Legal Opinion

Nahom v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 22, 1994No. 1 CA-CV 92-0495, 1 CA-CV 93-0018PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GERBER, Judge.

In these consolidated appeals, we must determine whether a hospital which has contracted with a patient’s insurer to accept a fixed amount is entitled to additional payments from the patient’s other insurance. We concur in the trial court’s determination that Appellant Herzel Nahom (“Nahom”) was a third-party beneficiary of the contract between Scottsdale Memorial Hospital (“Scottsdale Memorial”) and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc. (“Blue Cross”). This contract limited Scottsdale Memorial’s payment to a fixed amount. We affirm the trial court’s grant of…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Orme School v. ReevesArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Rawlings v. ApodacaArizona Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Sparks v. Republic National Life InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1993

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Ortiz Alvarado v. Great American Life Assurance Co. PRSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 2011
  2. Golchin v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
  3. Haisch v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2000
  4. Lopez v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  5. In re MH 2006-000749Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API