The California Court of Appeal has held that a general liability insurer had no duty to defend a corporation under the terms of a non-standard “additional insured” endorsement. ( Boeing Company v. Continental Casualty Company (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1258) Facts … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that where an insurer misrepresents the policy limits to induce an insured into settling a disputed insurance claim, the insured may keep the money paid and sue for fraud. ( Village Northridge Homeowners … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a homeowners insurer had no duty to defend a woman who allegedly was negligent in failing to prevent her husband from sexually molesting their daughter. ( Bjork v. State Farm Fire and … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a defamation suit against an insured did not suggest the possibility of an “occurrence,” or “accident,” within the meaning of a standard homeowners policy. ( Stellar v. State Farm General Insurance Company … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that an insured’s misrepresentations on an application for insurance allowed a liability insurer to rescind the policy and obtain reimbursement of defense/settlement costs the insurer had paid on behalf of the insured prior … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a pollution exclusion relieved an insurer of any duty to defend or indemnify an insured against claims for injuries caused by offensive odors and excessive dust emanating from the insured’s compost facility. … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has ruled that a primary auto insurer was entitled to contribution from an excess auto insurer for defense fees the primary insurer paid to defend a mutual insured, pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.9(g). ( … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that an insured’s misrepresentations on an application for insurance allowed a liability insurer to rescind the policy and obtain reimbursement of defense/settlement costs the insurer had paid on behalf of the insured prior … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a pollution exclusion relieved an insurer of any duty to defend or indemnify an insured against claims for injuries caused by offensive odors and excessive dust emanating from the insured’s compost facility. … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has ruled that a primary auto insurer was entitled to contribution from an excess auto insurer for defense fees the primary insurer paid to defend a mutual insured, pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.9(g). ( … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a liability insurer had a duty to defend its insured in an assault and battery case where there was evidence that the insured’s agent might have acted in “self-defense.” ( Jafari v. … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has ruled that a liability insurer whose policy covered a property manager as an additional insured was entitled to equitable contribution from another insurer whose policy covered the property manager as a named insured. ( … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that sums an insured agreed to pay in settlement of pollution claims are not “damages” within the meaning of the insured’s excess liability policies. ( Aerojet-General Corporation v. Commercial Union Insurance Company (2007) … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a business auto insurer had no duty to defend its insured, a shuttle company, against a personal injury lawsuit arising from an employee’s sexual assault of a passenger. ( R.A. Stuchbery & … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that an insurer that issued a CGL policy had a duty to defend its insured, a city, against a suit arising out of an auto accident allegedly caused by a dangerous condition resulting … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that, where two uninsured motorist policies have different limits, a pro-rata provision in one policy will control over an excess provision in the other policy. ( Allstate Insurance Company v. Mercury Insurance Company … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that a vehicle is not “uninsured” where a personal umbrella policy provides bodily injury liability coverage to the owner and operator of an otherwise uninsured motor vehicle. ( California Capital Insurance Company v. … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that (1) a general liability policy which was issued to an insured in Texas but which was to be performed in California should be interpreted under the laws of California, and (2) interpreting … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has held that, where two separate insureds have two separate policies covering the same property, each insurer must pay for only a part of a loss to the property. ( Burns v. California Fair Plan … Read More

The California Court of Appeal has concluded that a liability policy’s “development/construction exclusion” applied only if the insured—and not some third party—engaged in the excluded activity. ( Marquez Knolls Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Executive Risk Indemnity, Inc. (2007) WL … Read More