Jay A. Christofferson
5 River Park Place East
Fresno, CA 93720
(559) 433-1300 main
(559) 433-2300 fax
E-MAIL: Click Here
Juris Doctor, 1999 (with great distinction)
University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law
American Jurisprudence Awards: Bankruptcy, Federal Courts, Property
Order of the Coif
Chief Symposium Editor McGeorge Law Review
Comment Staff McGeorge Law Review
McGeorge Law Review Legislative writer (Greensheets)
Traynor Honor Society
Tutor for McGeorge Academic Enhancement Program
Master of Science, History, 1995
University of Utah
Bachelor of Arts, History and Political Science, 1992
University of California, Santa Barbara
Captain Track & Field Team
Big West Scholar Athlete
Special Olympics Volunteer
Concentrating in Insurance Coverage, Insurance Bad Faith, ERISA, Civil Litigation, and Subrogation matters.
Mr. Christofferson joined the Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Practice Group of McCormick Barstow in 1999.
Mr. Christofferson is admitted to practice law before all California State Courts. all U.S. District Courts of California, and U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal.
Honors and Awards
Mr. Christofferson has been selected as a 2009 Northern California Rising Star in the area of Insurance Coverage by the publishers of San Francisco Magazine and Law & Politics Magazine.
Mr. Christofferson is a member of the State Bar of California. He was also a Board Member for the Fresno County Young Lawyers from 2003-2005.
Federal Court Decisions
Alco Iron & Metal Co. v. American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166692 (N.D. Cal. 2012) (granting summary judgment to insurer on the basis that there was no duty to defend the insured in a conversion and wrongful entry of property against a corporate entity).
California Court of Appeal
Federal Ins. Co. v. Steadfast Ins. Co., 209 Cal. App. 4th 668(2012) (contribution action between insurers finding that an excess umbrella insurer had an obligation to pay dollar one of defense fees and costs based on it providing discrimination coverage that was not available under the primary insurer’s coverage or was otherwise excluded).
Federal Court Decisions
American International Specialty Lines Ins. Co. v. Continental Casualty Ins. Co. (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1342 (settling insurers did not have a claim for equitable contribution based on a failure to notify the objecting insurer of its potential liability for contribution prior to a settlement.)
F & H Construction v. ITT Hartford Ins. Co. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 364 (a contractor could not recover the cost of modifying inadequate steel pile caps as property damage was not established by the mere failure of a defective product to perform as intended.)
St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Frontier Pacific Ins. Co. (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 1234 (although a lessee had been dismissed from an action arising from an underlying tort claim, an insurer’s action for contribution from other carriers was remanded for determination of the lessee’s liability as necessary to allocate the contributions between the insurers.)
U.S. District Court - California
GBTI, Inc. v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS, 46917 (E.D. Cal. 2011) (granting insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment that a claim for piercing of the corporate veil does not create the requisite “vicarious liability” to establish coverage for shareholders, directors, or officers as “anyone liable” for the conduct of an insured under an omnibus provision in a commercial auto policy).
GBTI, Inc. v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (E.D. Cal. 2009) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70368 (Dismissal of claim for punitive damages against insurer.)
New Hampshire Insurance Company v. Mendocino Forest Products, Co., LLC (N.D. Cal. 2007) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76147 (negligence of an indemnitor is not required to establish the application of a general indemnity agreement).
Valley Air Conditioning & Repair, Inc. v. Beneficial Life Ins. Co. (E.D. Cal. 2007) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70111 (successful 12b(6) motion to eliminate claims for breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference with a protected property interest and violation of Insurance Code § 790.03)
U.S. District Court - Oregon
Am. Int’l Specialty Lines Ins. Co. v. KinderCare Learning Centers, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28212 (D. Or. 2011) (a failure to procure insurance by the insured precludes an insurer’s subrogation action as it constitutes a complete defense to a claim by an insurer).
American International Specialty Lines Insurance Company v. KinderCare Learning Centers, Inc., (D. Or. 2010) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78374 (granting AISLIC’s motion for summary judgment in establishing that KinderCare did not qualify as an additional insured as the loss did not arise out of AISLIC’s named insured’s ongoing operations).
Published Decisions - Non-Insurance
California Supreme Court
Utilities Cost Management v. Indian Wells Valley Water District (2001) 26 Cal.App.4th 1185 (the 120 day statute of limitations applied to an action by a public agency to recover amounts paid to a public utility for capital improvements barred plaintiff’s action.)
Publications & Lectures
CEB Book “Neighbor Disputes: Law and Litigation: Chapter on Solar and Wind Energy Development and Use.
“The Constitutionality of State Laws Banning Government Contracts With Burma: Upholding Federalism’s Purpose,” McGeorge Law Review