Legal Opinion

Fluke Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided August 28, 2000No. 44349-6-IPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBecker, J.

— In a California lawsuit, a jury found that Fluke Corporation had maliciously prosecuted a claim against a competitor. The court entered judgment for both punitive and compensatory damages. Fluke had commercial liability insurance through The Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, insuring Fluke for those sums it became obligated to pay as damages because of injury arising out of malicious prosecution. We hold that the policy covers punitive damages as well as compensatory damages; that Washington, unlike California, has no public policy invalidating insurance coverage for punitive damages…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Queen City Farms, Inc. v. Central Nat'l Ins. Co. of OmahaWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State Farm General Insurance v. EmersonWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Northwestern National Casualty Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin v. Edward A. McNulty and Walter Scott SmithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
  5. Burnside v. Simpson Paper Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Hearst Communications v. Seattle Times Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Hearst Communications, Inc. v. Seattle Times Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Axess Intern. Ltd. v. Intercargo Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  4. Axess International Ltd. v. Intercargo InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  5. Fluke Corp. v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2001

12 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