Legal Opinion

Chicago Title Insurance v. Office of the Insurance Commissioner

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided February 29, 2012No. 40752-3-IIPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohanson, J.

¶1 Chicago Title Insurance Company seeks reversal of an Office of Insurance Commissioner (OIC) ruling, arguing that the ruling erroneously imposed vicarious liability on Chicago Title for the regulatory violations of Land Title Insurance merely because Chicago Title underwrites Land Title’s title insurance policies. We hold that the OIC did not have statutory, inherent, or common law authority to impose vicarious liability on Chicago Title for regulatory violations Land Title committed. We reverse the OIC judge’s decision and reinstate the administrative law judge’s (ALJ) order granting…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Panag v. Farmers Ins. Co. of WashingtonWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  2. City of Redmond v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Ranger Ins. Co. v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Ranger Insurance v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2008
  5. King v. RivelandWashington Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Chicago Title Insurance v. Office of the Insurance CommissionerWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Chi. Title Ins. Co. v. Office of Ins. Comm'rWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Chicago Title Insurance v. Office of the Insurance CommissionerWashington Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API