Cases

ORDER HONORABLE J. RANDAL HALL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In these declaratory-judgment cases, two State Farm entities seek declarations that they do not owe coverage or a duty to defend or indemnify Defendant Robert Eugene Marshall for liability related to an altercation with Defendant Thomasina Parks in Marshall’s Toyota Avalon. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Marshall et al., No

ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, Presiding Judge Billy R. Richey (“Appellant”) appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Respondent”) on Appellant’s claim for uninsured motorist benefits under a policy issued by Respondent. We reverse and remand. I. BACKGROUND On the evening

Okder • GREGORY A. PRESNELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the Court on motions to dismiss (Doc. 120,121,123, 125) filed by various groups of Defendants, the responses in opposition (Doc. 133,134,153) to those motions filed by the Plaintiffs, and the replies (Doc. 137,138,146,154) filed by the movants. The portions of those motions having to do with the Plaintiffs’ state law claims

Order GREGORY A. PRESNELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the Cozurt on motions to dismiss (Doc. 89, 90, 92) filed by various groups of Defendants, the response in opposition (Doc. 98) to those motions filed by the Plaintiffs, and the replies (Doc. 99, 101, 103, 104) filed by the movants. The portions of those motions having to do with the Plaintiffs’ state law claims have been re

Order GREGORY A. PRESNELL, District Judge. On March 2, 2015, Magistrate Judge Smith issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 78), recommending that the Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Docs. 9, 17, and 19) be granted and that the Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed. The Plaintiffs filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 79), to which the Defendants responded (Does. 80-82). By thei

Order GREGORY A. PRESNELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the Court after a hearing on various motions to dismiss (Doc. 209-211) filed by the Defendants, the response in opposition (Doc. 216) filed by the Plaintiffs, the replies (Doc. 224, 226, 228) filed by the Defendants, and the sur-reply (Doc. 235). I. Background The instant case is one of

Order GREGORY A. PRESNELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the. Court on motions to dismiss (Doc., 37, 41, 42, 45) filed by various groups of Defendants, the responses in opposition (Doc. 58, 59) to those motions filed by the Plaintiff, and the replies (Doc. 60-63) filed by the mov-ants. The portions of those motions having to do with the Plaintiffs state law claims have been referre

On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 29A02-0603-CV-207 SULLIVAN, Justice. Richard Jakupko suffered severe injuries and his wife and children emotional distress in an automobile accident caused by an underinsured motorist. Their insurance company contends that their underin-sured motorist insurance policy subjects any amount the wife and children can recover for their emotional distr

OPINION By the Court, Maupin, J.: In response to a certified question submitted by the Nevada Federal District Court,1 we consider whether Nevada automobile insurers may contractually alter the statutory time frame within which an insured may file a claim for uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits. Although we do not entirely foreclose the possibility, we hold that the al

43 P.3d 1018 (2002) Anna RUBIN, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. No. 36631. Supreme Court of Nevada. April 12, 2002. *1019 Patti & Sgro, Las Vegas, for Appellant. Christian & Petersen, Las Vegas; Lewis & Roca and James E. Berchtold and Von S. Heinz, Las Vegas; Pearson, P

995 P.2d 482 (2000) The STATE of Nevada, DIVISION OF INSURANCE, Commissioner of Insurance, Alice Molasky, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Respondents. No. 31102. Supreme Court of Nevada. March 9, 2000. *484 Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General, and Edward T.

590 S.E.2d 798 (2003) 264 Ga. App. 443 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. HEALTH HORIZONS, INC. No. A03A1387. Court of Appeals of Georgia. December 1, 2003. Certiorari Denied March 8, 2004. *799 Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Elmer A. Simpson, Jr., John C. Patton, S

931 F.2d 51 Patton (Theron, Mary)v.Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Atcor, Inc., State FarmMutual Automobile Insurance Co.; State Farm MutualAutomobile Insurance Co. NOS. 89-1369, 89-1370 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. MAR 14, 1991 1 Appeal From: E.D.

194 Cal.App.3d 626 (1987) 239 Cal. Rptr. 750 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LANIDA PATTON, Defendant and Appellant. Docket No. B025629. Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Two. August 31, 1987. *627 COUNSEL Leach, Biesty & McGre

Opinion issued March 17, 2020 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-19-00821-CV ——————————— IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ

960 F.Supp. 233 (1997) Thomas E. MARTIN, Jr., and Tami Martin, Plaintiffs, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Does I through X and Roe Corporations I through X, Inclusive, Defendants. CV-S-96-1060-PMP (RLH). United States District Court, D. Nevada. March 24, 1997. *234 Jeffrey R. Gomel, Piazza & Associates, Lt

Judgment rendered August 28, 2024. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 55,823-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA ***** JANET JABBIA

857 P.2d 751 (1993) STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Ronald CRAMER, Respondent. No. 22965. Supreme Court of Nevada. July 29, 1993. *752 Pearson & Patton and Theodore J. Kurtz, Las Vegas, for appellant. David Allen & Associates and James W. King, Las Vegas, for respondent.

958 P.2d 733 (1998) STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Appellants and Cross-Respondents, v. COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE of the State of Nevada, Division of Insurance of the State of Nevada, Respondent and Cross-Appellant. No. 28359. Supreme Court of Nevada. May 19, 1998. *734 Pe

879 S.W.2d 720 (1994) STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Thomas FLANARY, Wanda Flanary and Allen Broeckelman, Respondents. No. 18898. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One. June 22, 1994. Motion for Rehearing and Transfer Denied July 14, 1994. Application to Transfer Denied August 15, 1994.