Cassel v. Schacht Cassel v. Schacht

Cassel v. Schacht

683 P.2d 294, 140 Ariz. 495, 1984.AZ.40272

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Beschreibung des Verlags

The facts are set forth in the opinion of the court of appeals. We agree with the result reached by that court. Plaintiffs argue, and we acknowledge, that the statute does not specifically cover the issue and that A.R.S. § 28-1170(B)(2) does require all policies to cover "the liability imposed by law for damages arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the motor vehicle." Plaintiffs are also correct in arguing that subsection E of A.R.S. § 28-1170 does not authorize exclusion of coverage for punitive damages. However, as the court of appeals noted, the express requirement of § 28-1170(B)(2) is that the policy contain "[f]ifteen thousand dollars [coverage for] bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident" and "thirty thousand dollars because of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in any one accident."

GENRE
Gewerbe und Technik
ERSCHIENEN
1984
29. Mai
SPRACHE
EN
Englisch
UMFANG
3
Seiten
VERLAG
LawApp Publishers
GRÖSSE
50,3
 kB

Mehr Bücher von Arizona Supreme Court

Magma Copper Co. v. Industrial Commission Magma Copper Co. v. Industrial Commission
1964
State V. Milke State V. Milke
1993
Swanson v. Image Bank Swanson v. Image Bank
2003
Allstate Insurance Co. v. O''toole Allstate Insurance Co. v. O''toole
1995
Aesthetic Property Maintenance Inc. v. Capital Indemnity Corp. Aesthetic Property Maintenance Inc. v. Capital Indemnity Corp.
1995
Sohl v. Winkler Sohl v. Winkler
1994