Legal Opinion
City of Santa Rosa v. Twin City Fire Insurance
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided August 8, 2006No. 25,126PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRY, Judge.
{1} In this insurance case, we consider whether the filing of a discrimination charge with state and federal agencies constitutes a “claim” under a type of insurance policy known as a “claims made” policy. The City of Santa Rosa contends that its eventual monetary settlement with a terminated worker (Worker) over allegations of racial discrimination should be covered by a Twin City Fire Insurance (Twin City) policy. Because we conclude that the policy contains clear and unambiguous language, our duty is to enforce that language as written as an expression of the intent of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Rummel v. Lexington InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
- Mitchell-Carr v. McLendonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1999
- Battishill v. Farmers Alliance InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
- Continental Casualty Co. v. MaxwellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bhasker v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2019
- United Nuclear Corp. v. Allstate InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2012
- Grissom v. First National Insurance AgencyMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. Gandy Dancer, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2013
- Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, Subscribing to Policy Number 501/ Nb03acmd v. NanceDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.