Larson v. Hartford Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWilken, Senior District Judge
I concur in parts I, II and III A of the majority’s decision. I respectfully dissent from parts III B and IV.
In part III B, the majority affirms the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment for Hartford on Larson’s claim that Hartford, in bad faith, denied payment of her medical expenses from the date of her injury at work on July 28,2010, until December 29, 2010, when it paid them.
The workers’ compensation policy of the state of Arizona is to provide medical care and disability income to injured workers and to do so expeditiously. The Arizona Supreme Court has “consistently…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Harper v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Noble v. National American Life InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1981
- Zilisch v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2000
- Aitken v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1995
- Post v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONAArizona Supreme Court · 1989
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.