Legal Opinion

Maricopa County v. Barfield

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided September 5, 2003No. 1 CA-CV 01-0438PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TIMMER, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Recently, our supreme court held that Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 33-934 (2000) authorizes a health care provider to enforce its lien “only against those liable to an injured person.” Blankenbaker v. Jonovich, 205 Ariz. 383, 71 P.3d 910 at ¶ 1 (2003). The court additionally determined that § 33-934 identifies the only parties subject to lien enforcement actions. Id. at ¶ 17. In this appeal, we decide whether a tortfeasor’s insurer is one “liable to an injured person,” thereby permitting a health care provider to enforce its lien against that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Sandoval v. ChenowethArizona Supreme Court · 1967
  2. West Nebraska General Hospital v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Blankenbaker v. JonovichArizona Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Walter v. WilkinsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2000
  5. Andrews v. Samaritan Health SystemCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pargman v. VickersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  2. Abbott v. Banner Health NetworkCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. Midtown Medical Group, Inc. v. Farmers Insurance GroupCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  4. Aguilera v. Auto-Owners InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  5. Anderson v. Everest National InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2013

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