Dairyland Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying Idaho law under which, at that time, exclusion was valid though accident occurred in Washington where exclusion was invalid
• applying Idaho law under which, at that time, exclusion was valid though accident occurred in Washington where exclusion was invalid
• Washington rule invalidating an exclusion does not apply to coverage for car accident that occurred in Washington, because the only contacts with the insurance policy were with Idaho, whose law recognized the exclusion.
• Washington rule invalidating an exclusion does not apply to coverage for car accident that occurred in Washington, because the only contacts with the insurance policy were with Idaho, whose law recognized the exclusion
• “Washington recognizes that an insurance company has a ‘legitimate 22 interest . . . in preventing an increase in the quantum of risk without a corresponding 1 increase in the premium . . . .’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).