GENERAL SECURITY INDEM. CO. v. Tipton (2007)
green
· 43 citation events
across 4 courts.
Showing the 4 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200720162026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Iverson v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co. (2011)
Tipton, 2007 UT App 109 §11, 158 P.3d 1121 (alterations in original) (footnote omitted) (quoting House Floor Debate on S.B. 189, 53rd Leg., Gen.
statement of Rep. Koehn
green
Jones v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company (2025)
Co. of Arizona v. Tipton, 2007 UT App 109, ¶ 17 , 158 P.3d 1121, 1126 (internal citations omitted). 66 Utah Code Ann. § 31A-22-302 (1)(c). protection “provides coverage for a covered person,” 67 including individuals other than the named insured who occupy a vehicle referred to in the policy.68 Accordingly, the Policy here offers UIM protection for “covered person[s]” other than just the named insured.69 The Policy even explicitly states that its UIM provision “[p]rovides be…
green
Garner v. Cincinnati Insurance Company (2025)
Co. of Arizona v. Tipton, 158 P.3d 1121, 1125 (Utah Ct. App. 2007) (cleaned up) (citing Lee R.
cleaned up
green
Kingston v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. (2015)
See id. 1% 20, 22-283 (concluding that the maximum UM coverage "available by the insurer under the insured's ... policy" refers to the maximum amount the insured could have purchased rather than the amount actually purchased). {17 The Kingstons contend that they are entitled to $250,000, rather than $100,000, in benefits under the Automobile Policy.