Royal MacCabees Life Insurance v. Choren

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[o]ur inquiry . . . embraces a de novo review of the instructions in their entirety”
• stating that the plain-error standard requires demonstration of an error “that is plain or obvious under existing law”
• holding “we must reverse if we find that the jury might have based its decision on the [legally erroneous] instruction”
• holding “w e must reverse if we find that the jury might have based its decision on the [legally erroneous] instruction”
• stating that the plain-error standard requires demonstration of an error “that is plain or obvious under existing law”
• finding no anticipatory repudiation under Colorado law where insurer “at no time preemptively denied coverage . . . but instead chose to have the issue of coverage adjudicated”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).