Legal Opinion
Twin City Fire Insurance v. Superior Court
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided May 29, 1990No. CV-89-0353-SAPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAMERON, Justice.
I. JURISDICTION AND ISSUE
Twin City Fire Insurance Company (Twin City) petitioned this court to accept jurisdiction of a special action filed directly from the superior court. We granted jurisdiction in this case, and in Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 164 Ariz. 286, 792 P.2d 749 (1990) to determine what duty, if any, a primary insurer owes an excess insurer with respect to accepting settlement offers. We granted jurisdiction pursuant to Rules 4(a) and 7(a) of the Arizona Rules of Procedure for Special Actions, 17B A.R.S. We have…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commercial Union Assurance Companies v. Safeway Stores, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1980
- Farmers Insurance Exchange v. HendersonArizona Supreme Court · 1957
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Michigan Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
- Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. North Star Reinsurance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- American Centennial Insurance Co. v. Canal Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
- Twin City Fire Insurance Company v. Country Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Hartford Casualty Insurance v. New Hampshire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
- American Centennial Insurance Co. v. Canal Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1991
- California Casualty Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.