Legal Opinion · Dissent

First American Title Insurance v. Johnson Bank

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided June 13, 2016No. CV-15-0244-PRPublished

1DissentBales, C.J.

¶ 50 I agree with the majority that the title insurance policy is facially ambiguous regarding the proper date (policy issuance versus foreclosure) on which to measure an insured lender’s loss when an undisclosed title defect, lien or encumbrance (a “title defect”) reduces the value of property securing a loan. Supra ¶ 18.1 also agree that the diminution in value generally is measured as of the date of foreclosure. Supra ¶ 47. Because I believe the same date should be used in the circumstances of this case, I respectfully dissent.

¶ 51 The majority holds that the drop in value should be…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. First Midwest Bank, N.A. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 2006
  2. First American Title Insurance v. Action Acquisitions, LLCArizona Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Barstad v. Stewart Title Guar. Co., Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Barstad v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Tower Plaza Investments, Limited v. DeWittArizona Supreme Court · 1973

7 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