Legal Opinion

Tallent v. National General Insurance

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1996No. CV-95-0244-PRPublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOELLER, Justice.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The trial court held that insurers who are required by former A.R.S. § 20-259.01(C) to offer underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) to insureds must also provide an explanation of the nature of such coverage. 1 In a spht decision, the court of appeals affirmed. We granted review and have jurisdiction pursuant to Ariz. Const, art. VI, § 5(3). We reverse.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Maria and David Tallent purchased an insurance pohey from National General Insurance Company (National) in 1988. In November of that year, Ms. TaEent was involved in an…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Silver v. SlusherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
  2. State v. SweetArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  3. City of Mesa v. KillingsworthArizona Supreme Court · 1964
  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wannamaker Ex Rel. Estate of WannamakerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  5. Wilderness World, Inc. v. Department of RevenueArizona Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Government Employees Insurance Co. v. Graham-GonzalezAlaska Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Ballesteros v. American Standard InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. KorzuchArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Day v. LSI Corp.District Court, D. Arizona · 2016
  5. Transportation Insuarnce v. BruiningArizona Supreme Court · 1996

17 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