# Sparks v. Republic National Life Insurance

> Arizona Supreme Court · June 10, 1982 · 132 Ariz. 529

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547679

## Case

- **Full name:** Calvin C. SPARKS and Suzanne Sparks, Husband and Wife, Appellees, v. REPUBLIC NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation; American Life Pension Health Associates Corporation, an Iowa Corporation, Dba Alpha Corporation, Planned Security Trust, a Trust, Appellants
- **Court:** Arizona Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 10, 1982
- **Citations:** 132 Ariz. 529; 647 P.2d 1127; 1982 Ariz. LEXIS 217
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Holohan
- **Judges:** Hays, Gordon, Cameron, Holohan, Feldman
- **Cited by:** 386 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547679

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that although an action for misrepresentation under A.R.S. § 20- 433 would normally arise in the context of an insurance contract, a tort committed by an insurer “would not involve a breach of the actual contract; therefore, it would not be an action arising from a con…
- stating that because “the tort of bad faith cannot be committed absent the existence of an insurance contract and a breach thereof,” the tort of bad faith is “intrinsically related to the contract,” such that attorneys’ fees may be awarded under A.R.S. § 12-341.01
- holding that there is no violation of due process when “[a] full hearing was conducted on the issue of attorney’s fees”
- holding limitations in insurance policy unexpected, and thus unenforceable, in light of language in a pamphlet given to insureds before they purchased insurance which created reasonable expectations of coverage despite language in the policy

## Opinion text

HOLOHAN, Chief Justice,
concurring:
I concur in the result.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547679. Public record. Not legal advice.