8 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1936–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Graham v. James F. Jackson Associates, Inc.green2 sentences2000Co. v. Fore, 785 F.Supp. 947, 949 (M.D.Ala.1992) ("Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured's criminal acts."); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) ("It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts."); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me.1998) ("The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts."); Litrenta v. 2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 | 2 | 2 |
Herrman v. Folkertsgreen2 sentences2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 | 2 | 2 |
Landry v. Leonardgreen2 sentences2000Co. v. Fore, 785 F.Supp. 947, 949 (M.D.Ala.1992) ("Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured's criminal acts."); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) ("It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts."); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me.1998) ("The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts."); Litrenta v. 2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 | 2 | 2 |
Litrenta v. Republic Insurancegreen2 sentences2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 2000Ala. 1992) (“Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured’s criminal acts.”); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) (“It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts.”); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me. 1998) (“The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts.”); Litrenta v. Republic Ins., 245 A.D.2d 344 , 665 | 2 | 2 |
Horace Mann Insurance v. Foregreen1 sentence2000Co. v. Fore, 785 F.Supp. 947, 949 (M.D.Ala.1992) ("Alabama law is unambiguous on the point that nothing requires an insurer to indemnify a third party for the insured's criminal acts."); Herrman v. Folkerts, 202 Kan. 116 , 446 P.2d 834, 837 (1968) ("It is generally held that an insurance policy is void as against public policy if its intent is to indemnify the insured against liability for his criminal acts."); Landry v. Leonard, 720 A.2d 907, 909 (Me.1998) ("The general rule is that it is against public policy for insurance to indemnify an insured against his own criminal acts."); Litrenta v. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Western Heritage Insurance v. Estate of Dean
green
2 sentences2010Counsel especially called the insurer's attention to an out-of-state case that clearly supported coverage, citing Western Heritage Insurance Co. v. Estate of Dean, 55 F.Supp.2d 646 (E.D.Texas, 1998) (finding that a tavern owner's failure to render aid to an injured patron was a covered occurrence, not excluded by an assault and battery exclusion). 2010Counsel especially called the insurer’s attention to an out-of-state case that clearly supported coverage, citing Western Heritage Insurance Co. v. Estate of Dean, 55 F. Supp. 2d 646 (E.D. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
H.B.H. v. State
green
1 sentence2022GEICO asserts that Murphy instead testified that he “considers how the injury affected the insured and those factors which can be monetarily calculated.” Id. (citing 4 RP 472-73). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Tibbs v. Johnson
green
1 sentence2014Tibbs, 30 Wn. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Steinmetz v. Hall-Conway-Jackson, Inc.
green
2 sentences1992At the time of assignment, the insured had a claim for negligence against the insurance agent, and could properly assign that claim to the injured party. 49 Wn. 1992At the time of assignment, the insured had a claim for negligence against the insurance agent, and could properly assign that claim to the injured party. 49 Wn. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
green
2 sentences1936Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 107 Conn. 446 , 140 Atl. 816 ; Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co., 121 Cal. App. 211 , 9 P. (2d) 245 ; Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile Ins. 1936Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 107 Conn. 446 , 140 Atl. 816 ; Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co., 121 Cal. App. 211 , 9 P. (2d) 245 ; Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile Ins. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co.
green
2 sentences1936Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 107 Conn. 446 , 140 Atl. 816 ; Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co., 121 Cal. App. 211 , 9 P. (2d) 245 ; Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile Ins. 1936Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 107 Conn. 446 , 140 Atl. 816 ; Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co., 121 Cal. App. 211 , 9 P. (2d) 245 ; Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile Ins. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.