Leetz v. Amica Mutual Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “status distinctions remain important in the decision to create exceptions to the general rule that it is unreasonable to impose a duty to anticipate and control the actions of third persons”
• interpreting § 10-4-609 and concluding that its reduction provision was not applicable to payments made to persons who were insureds under underinsured motorist policy
• construing Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-4-609(4)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).