Hagen v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Ins. Co.
Jon Mark HAGEN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Garnishee Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
FELDMAN, Justice.
This is a contested garnishment proceeding brought against an insurer by the insured’s assignee. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the assignee, Hagen. The court of appeals reversed and remanded with instructions.
Hagen v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, 138 Ariz. 521 , 675 P.2d 1340 (App.1983). Both parties have petitioned us for review.
See Rule 23(a), Arizona Rules of Civ.App.Proc., 17A A.R.S.
After review of the record, we conclude that the opinion of the court of appeals is correct and that all issues were properly decided. Ordinarily, we would simply deny review. However, while denial of review usually attests our approval of the result reached by the court of appeals, it does not necessarily indicate our approval of the legal analysis contained in the opinion. See generally Washington v. Confederated Bands and Tribes, 439 U.S. 463, 477 , 99 S.Ct. 740, 749 , 58 L.Ed.2d 740 n. 20 (1979). Because we do agree with the court’s legal analysis in the case at bench, and because the opinion deals with several issues not previously settled in this State, we hereby adopt the opinion of the court of appeals and indicate our agreement with the legal principles set forth in that opinion.
HOLOHAN, C.J., GORDON, V.C.J., and HAYS and CAMERON, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(Denial of review usually attests approval of result, but not necessar ily approval of analysis.)
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.