Lowing v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Arizona Supreme Court
859 P.2d 724 (1993)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Paula Lowing (plaintiff) was riding as a passenger when Salvatore Gentile (plaintiff) swerved his car off the road to avoid colliding with a reckless driver, who was never identified. Gentile’s car overturned, and Lowing was injured. Allstate Insurance Company, Inc. (Allstate) (defendant) insured Gentile under a policy that, as required by state statute, contained uninsured-motorist coverage. Precedent held that the statute required such coverage only if a claimant could identify and prove that the wrongdoing driver was uninsured. However, Allstate’s policy also covered injuries caused by an unidentified wrongdoer, provided that the wrongdoer inflicted those injuries in a direct hit-and-run collision. Allstate denied coverage for Lowing’s injuries on the grounds that Gentile did not actually collide with the wrongdoer. On the basis of controlling precedent, the trial court entered judgment for Allstate and was upheld by an intermediate appellate court. Lowing appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, which consolidated Lowing’s case with another appeal, involving similar facts, brought by Lewis Horvath (plaintiff) against his insurer, Continental Casualty (defendant).
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Martone, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
