Legal Opinion
Satterwhite v. Stolz
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided June 7, 1968No. 118PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION-
WOOD, Judge.
The questions presented concern a “comprehensive personal liability policy” issued by third-party defendant to Stolz (defendant-third party plaintiff). They are: (1) Duty to defend; (2) Conflict of interest in defending; (3) The “no-action” clause; and (4) Duty to pay.
Plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries allegedly inflicted by Stolz. Third-party defendant refused to defend Stolz.
Stolz filed his third-party complaint alleging that third-party defendant; (a) “is o.r may be” liable to Stolz for all or part of plaintiff’s claim; (b) is obligated to defend against…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Heyden Newport Chemical Corp. v. Southern General Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1965
- St. Louis Dressed Beef & Provision Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Farm Bureau Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. HammerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
- United Services Automobile Association v. James B. RussomCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
- Olguin v. ThygesenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. PeppersIllinois Supreme Court · 1976
- Thornton v. PaulIllinois Supreme Court · 1978
- Burd v. Sussex Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
- San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Prahm v. Rupp Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.