Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Newton

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Newton

500 P.2d 900, 18 Ariz. App. 115, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 794

CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona

DecidedSeptember 14, 1972

DocketNo. 2 CA-CIV 1142

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 500 P.2d 900 (Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Newton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Newton, 500 P.2d 900, 18 Ariz. App. 115, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 794 (Ark. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

HOWARD, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment on stipulated facts in favor of the appellee and against the appellant insurance company. There is but one question dispositive of [116]*116this appeal: Is an insurance company precluded from denying liability for a judgment rendered against a former insured when the policy of insurance has been terminated prior to the accident because of a nonpayment of premium, but the insurance company does not return the SR-1A form to the Motor Vehicle Division of the Arizona Highway Department? This issue has recently been decided in the case of Nicholas v. Carolina Casualty Co., 17 Ariz. App. 252, 497 P.2d 72 (1972) ¹ wherein the court held that the failure to file an SR-1A form does not preclude an insurer from ■denying liability.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial ■court awarding judgment in favor of the appellee and against the appellant is reversed.

KRUCKER, C. J., and HATHAWAY, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HOWARD, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment on stipulated facts in favor of the appellee and against the appellant insurance company. There is but one question dispositive of [116]*116this appeal: Is an insurance company precluded from denying liability for a judgment rendered against a former insured when the policy of insurance has been terminated prior to the accident because of a nonpayment of premium, but the insurance company does not return the SR-1A form to the Motor Vehicle Division of the Arizona Highway Department? This issue has recently been decided in the case of Nicholas v. Carolina Casualty Co., 17 Ariz. App. 252, 497 P.2d 72 (1972) ¹ wherein the court held that the failure to file an SR-1A form does not preclude an insurer from ■denying liability.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial ■court awarding judgment in favor of the appellee and against the appellant is reversed.

KRUCKER, C. J., and HATHAWAY, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

500 P.2d 900, 18 Ariz. App. 115, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aetna-casualty-surety-co-v-newton-arizctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack