Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lawyers' Title Guaranty Fund v. Sanders

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 8, 1977No. 50221Published

1DissentDoolin, Justice

While I agree with the majority the principle of equitable subrogation by operation of law certainly exists and is applicable to an insurer who has paid a loss; it is not applicable under the facts and circumstances here. I therefore dissent.

Buyers’ attorney neglected to make a requirement regarding a second mortgage existing on the property. After the purchase, buyers paid off the second mortgage. Buyers then made a claim against the errant attorney for malpractice. The attorney’s malpractice insurance carriers (insurers) paid the buyers’ malpractice claim.

As the majority points out there…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Sutton v. JondahlCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1975
  2. International Insurance Co. v. Medical-Professional Building of Corpus ChristiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
  3. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, a Corporation v. First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa, Okl., a National Banking AssociationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1961
  4. Jorski Mill & Elevator Co., Inc., and Millers Mutual Insurance Association of Illinois v. Farmers Elevator Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1968
  5. General Creditors of the Estate of Harris v. CornettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966

2 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