Legal Opinion

Chanay v. Chittenden

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided April 13, 1977No. 12667PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAYS, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order granting the appellees’ motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 17A A.R.S. Supreme Court Rules, rule 47(e)(5). The pertinent facts are as follows.

Appellant Don Chanay filed a complaint claiming four causes of action against appellees, Union Mutual Life Insurance Co. (hereinafter referred to as Union Mutual) and George Chittenden (hereinafter referred to as Chittenden). Chittenden previously had been a vice-president of Union Mutual and was, at the time the action was filed, a general agent for Union Mutual in Arizona. A third…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Speegle v. Board of Fire UnderwritersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Imperial Ice Co. v. RossierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Chandler v. Washington Toll Bridge AuthorityWashington Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Continental Car-Na-Var Corp. v. MoseleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Herron v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Sterner v. Marathon Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial HospitalArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  3. 9 to 5 Fashions, Inc. v. SpurneySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
  4. Yaindl v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. Standard Pump-Aldrich DivisionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1982

51 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