Legal Opinion

Wilks v. Manobianco

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 22, 2014No. 1 CA-CV 13-0216PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NORRIS, Judge:

¶ 1 The principal issue in this appeal is whether an insurance agent’s compliance with Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 20-259.01(B) (Supp. 2013), a statute that requires insurers to offer uninsured and un-derinsured motorist coverage to their insureds, bars an insured from asserting a professional negligence claim against an insurance agent for failing to obtain the under-insured motorist coverage the insured requested and the agent agreed to procure. As we explain, the statute does not bar such a claim.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

¶2 In 2001, Lesley Wilks…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Gipson v. KaseyArizona Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Deer Valley Unified School District No. 97 v. HouserArizona Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Ballesteros v. American Standard InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Quality Furniture, Inc. v. HayHawaii Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wilks Et Vir v. ManobiancoArizona Supreme Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API