Legal Opinion

AMCO Insurance v. Tri-Spur Investment Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 20, 2004No. 29551PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHROEDER, Chief Justice.

The District Court of Madison County granted AMCO Insurance Company’s (AMCO) motion for summary judgment, holding that AMCO has no duty to defend or indemnify Tri-Spur for claimed damages arising from alleged civil rights violations. Tri-Spur maintains that the district court erred in ruling that the claims made against Tri-Spur did not encompass potential liabilities covered under the AMCO policy and that the civil rights exclusion in the AMCO policy is ambiguous and therefore unenforceable against Tri-Spur.

I

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This case arose from…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Baxter v. CraneyIdaho Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Brinkman v. Aid Insurance Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Foremost Insurance v. PutzierIdaho Supreme Court · 1981
  4. County of Kootenai v. Western Casualty & Surety Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Eagle Water Co., Inc. v. Roundy Pole Fence Co., Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hall v. Farmers Alliance Mutual InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Melichar v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Hauschulz v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Scout, LLC v. Truck Ins. Exch.Idaho Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Northland LLC v. Contractors Bonding & Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. Idaho · 2022

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