State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Fennema

How courts have described this case

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

• “[W]e hold that for an insurer to justify foreclosing an insured's right to underinsured motorist benefits, the insurer must demonstrate it was substantially prejudiced by the insured's breach of the consent-to-settle provision.”
• “[W]e hold that for an insurer to justify foreclosing an insured's right to underinsured motorist benefits, the insurer must demonstrate it was substantially prejudiced by the insured's breach of the consent-to-settle provision.”
• “[W]e hold that for an insurer to justify foreclosing an insured’s right to underinsured motorist benefits, the insurer must demonstrate it was substantially prejudiced by the insured’s breach of the consent-to-settle provision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).