Legal Opinion
Fire Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 26, 2010No. E046531PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McKINSTER, Acting P. J.
—Building a structure that encroaches onto another’s property is not an accident even if the owners acted in the good faith but mistaken belief that they were legally entitled to build where they did. Because their homeowners policy did not provide coverage for nonaccidental occurrences, the owners’ insurer had no duty to defend when the owners were sued by the adjoining landowner as a result of the encroachment. Accordingly, the owners’ insurer was entitled to summary judgment in the action for breach of contract and bad faith brought by the owners. We therefore…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
- Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Vons Companies, Inc. v. Seabest Foods, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1996
- J. C. Penney Casualty Insurance v. M. K.California Supreme Court · 1991
- Merced Mutual Insurance v. MendezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Albert v. Mid-Century Ins. CA2/8California Court of Appeal · 2015
- State Farm General Insurance v. FrakeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Traveler's Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. Actavis, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. Gandy Dancer, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
- Navigators Specialty Insurance Co. v. Moorefield Construction, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.