Cases

(2008) Shawna MELTON, Plaintiff, v. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, et al., Defendants. No. CIV-07-1014-HE. United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma. November 12, 2008. ORDER JOE HEATON, District Judge. Plaintiff Shawna Melton sued Farmers Insurance Group, Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Insurance Company, Inc. ("Farmers" or defend

PAUL E. DANIELSON, Justice, concurring in part, dissenting in part. While I concur with the majority’s holding on all other points, I respectfully dissent on- the question involving the Arkansas Franchise Practices Act (AFPA), as I believe that a genuine issue of material fact exists. As set forth by the majority, “franchise” is defined with

691 N.E.2d 1259 (1998) Allen COLLEY and Betty Colley, Appellants-Plaintiffs, v. INDIANA FARMERS MUTUAL INSURANCE GROUP, Appellee-Defendant. No. 46A03-9609-CV-350. Court of Appeals of Indiana. February 19, 1998. *1260 Robert W. Mysliwiec, Edward P. Benchik, Jones, Obenchain, Ford, Pankow, Lewis & Woods, South Bend, for Appella

128 Mich. App. 307 (1983) 340 N.W.2d 71 STONEWALL INSURANCE GROUP v. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP Docket No. 63662. Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided May 11, 1983. Taylor & Braun, P.C. (by Richard L. Braun, II), for plaintiff. *308 Harvey, Kruse & Westen, P.C. (by Mark D.

OPINION ANNE GARDNER, Justice. This is the second appeal in a case involving a claim under a homeowner’s policy issued by Appellant Farmers Insurance Exchange, a Farmers Insurance Group entity (Farmers), to Appellee Tammy Poteet for damages allegedly caused by a November 2002 discharge of black smoke and soot from the central heating and air-conditioning

ORDER McCARTHY, United States Magistrate Judge. Before the Court for decision is Plaintiff’s Motion For Order Directing Counsel to Cease Obstructionist Tactics During Oral Depositions [Dkt. 40], The Court has *560reviewed all of the pleadings relating to this issue and heard argument of counsel concerning the same. Pla

GOOD v. FARMERS INSURANCE CO.2023 OK CIV APP 28Case Number: 120257Decided: 02/15/2023Mandate Issued: 09/13/2023DIVISION IIITHE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, DIVISION III Cite as: 2023 OK CIV APP 28, __ P.3d __ BRENDA GOOD, Plaintiff v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY; FARMERS

GOOD v. FARMERS INSURANCE CO.2023 OK CIV APP 28Case Number: 120257Decided: 02/15/2023Mandate Issued: 09/13/2023DIVISION IIITHE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, DIVISION III Cite as: 2023 OK CIV APP 28, __ P.3d __ BRENDA GOOD, Plaintiff v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY; FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE; and

OSCN Found Document:GOOD v. FARMERS INSURANCE CO. Previous Case Top Of Index This Point in Index Citationize Next Case Print Only

J. C. White recovered a judgment against Charles Cozby and Gene Scott for $5,000.00 actual and $2,500.00 exemplary damages in connection with the purchase by White of a Caveman motorhome from Cozby. Gene Scott has appealed and contends there is no evidence to support the jury finding that he was connected with Cozby in the fraudulent sale of the motorhome. Special Issue No. 5 and the jury's answers are as follows: `Were Charles Cozby and Gene Scott connected

OPINION Farmers Insurance Group and its member company Truck Insurance Exchange (collectively Truck) appeal from a judgment on a jury verdict against Truck and in favor of Larkspur Isle Condominium Owners' Association, Inc. (LICOA) in an action for breach of a property insurance policy. Truck contends it had no liability under the policy as a matter of law, because the loss for which LICOA made its claim manifested itself prior to the beginning of Truck's policy period

Justice WILLETT, concurring in part. The Court is right that today’s outcome is dictated by the Insurance Code as it is written. That being so, I wish the Court were more inhibited to do what we have prohibited — mine extratextual clues to illuminate an already-unambiguous statute. Text alone does not answer every question, but it answers many, including today’s, as the Court concedes. I accept a cautious

JUSTICE BILANDIC, dissenting: I respectfully dissent. For the reasons explained below, I would hold unconstitutional that portion of section 143a of the Illinois Insurance Code (215 ILCS 5/143a (West 1996)) requiring arbitration. Plaintiffs insurance policy contained an arbitration clause. Specificall

Docket No. 84208–Agenda 21–September 1998. JULIE REED, Appellee, v. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP, Appellant. Opinion filed October 21, 1999. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court: The defendant, Farmers Insurance Group, brings this appeal from a decision by the appellate court (291 Ill. App. 3d 1068) that found part of section 143a of the Illinois Insurance Code (215 ILCS 5/143a

MEMORANDUM ** 1. We decide the merits of this appeal as follows. Kenneth Stern appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration of the denial of his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4) motion for relief from judgment based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Stern argues that the district court lacked supplemental jurisdiction over his state-law claim against his former clients,

151 P.3d 92 (2006) 2006 OK 66 Bill BURGESS and Betty Burgess, Plaintiffs/Appellees, and Gary Sadeghy, Intervenor/Plaintiff/Appellee v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. Farmers Insurance Exchange, Farmers Insurance Group of Companies and Farmers Group, Inc., Defendants/Appellants. No. 99,739. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. September 19, 2006. R

Filed 10/1/13; pub. order & mod. 10/28/13 (see end of opn.; reposted as corrected 10/28/13) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, B248324 Petitioner, (Los Angeles County

215 P.3d 919 (2009) 230 Or. App. 403 Araceli CARDENAS (Castellano), Plaintiff-Respondent Cross-Appellant, v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant Cross-Respondent. 051213555, A135642. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted on February 18, 2009. Decided August 19, 2009. *920

209 P.3d 357 (2009) 228 Or. App. 454 Mark STRAWN, on his own behalf and as representative of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY OF OREGON, an Oregon stock insurance company; Mid-Century Insurance Company, a foreign corporation; and Truck Insurance Exchange, a foreign corporation, Defendants-Appellants, and Farmers Insurance Group Inc., a foreign corporation, Defend

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS ════════════ No. 10-0245 ════════════