Legal Opinion

Vision One, LLC v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 2012No. 85350-9PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

¶1 This case involves the proper interpretation of a “resulting loss” clause in an all-risk insurance policy. It also provides an opportunity to clarify application of the efficient proximate cause rule. The Court of Appeals overturned a jury verdict in favor of the insured, reasoning that the resulting loss clause did not apply in the absence of a secondary covered peril that proximately caused the loss. The court remanded for a jury determination as to the efficient proximate cause of the insured’s loss, holding that if the efficient proximate cause was not itself a covered peril, then the…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Queen City Farms, Inc. v. Central Nat'l Ins. Co. of OmahaWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. McDonald v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Garvey v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.California Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Hayden v. Mutual of Enumclaw InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. VISION ONE v. Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Sprague v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaWashington Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Gardens Condo. v. Farmers Ins. Exch.Washington Supreme Court · 2024
  4. Belmain Place Condominium Owners Association v. American Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2019
  5. Hotel Roslyn LLC v. AmGuard Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2024

1 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