Decrease Font Size
Increase Font Size

Coverage Alerts


Failure of insurer to consider additional information submitted in support of claim sufficient to raise triable issue of fact regarding the reasonableness of the insurer's conduct and defeat a summary judgment motion based on the genuine dispute doctrine.


Workers' Compensation insurer addressing workers' compensation claim is not limited to cancellation as remedy for misrepresentations made in an application, but may also seek rescission.



In the case of a "partial loss" under an open fire insurance policy, the insurer is obligated under Insurance Code section 2051 to pay reasonable cost to repair, less depreciation, and may not limit its payment to fair market value before the loss. 


Willful misconduct exclusion which did not apply to defense costs could not support demurrer in coverage action where underlying action was still pending on appeal.  


Van provided to employee by employer for her regular use was not a covered vehicle under her personal automobile policy. 


California Insurance Commissioner was statutorily authorized in enacting regulations governing replacement cost estimates used for determining homeowners insurance coverage limits pursuant to Insurance Code Section 790.10 wherein the Commissioner was directed to "promulgate reasonable rules and are necessary to administer" the Unfair Insurance Practices Act. 


Although insured was responsible to reimburse insurer for amounts paid by insurer in settlement of uncovered claims, it did not have to reimburse amounts paid in settlement which represented attorney's fees and costs within the supplementary payments provision of the policy.


Where excess carrier for contractor failed to show injuries were caused by subcontractor, court properly granted summary judgment in favor of subcontractor's excess carrier.


Structural damage occurring over time and during policy period resulting in a fire after policy expiration may still require insurer to defend insured.


Brandt fees awarded post-verdict should be considered in determining constitutionality of compensatory damages/punitive damages ratio. This decision follows the remand ordered by the California Supreme Court in Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 363.