Legal Opinion
Dykstra v. Foremost Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 19, 1993No. D016082PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BENKE, Acting P. J.
In this case the liability insurance policies obtained by the plaintiffs provided coverage for “accidents.” Alleged misrepresentations made by the plaintiffs for the purpose of inducing participation in a business venture are not “accidents” within the meaning of those policies. Accordingly the defendant insurer did not owe the plaintiffs any duty to defend them in an action based solely on the alleged misrepresentations.
Factual and Procedural Background
1. Policies
Between 1983 and 1988 plaintiff and appellant Holland Motor Homes Michigan (Holland Michigan) obtained…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Merced Mutual Insurance v. MendezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Royal Globe Insurance v. WhitakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Chatton v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- McLaughlin v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Wood v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1998
- Amato v. Mercury Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1993
- Nova Casualty Co. v. Able Construction, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1999
- Ticor Title Insurance v. Employers Insurance of WausauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.