John Rondinelli, Inc. v. Safeco Title Insurance Co.

Rondinelli alleges that Merit (through Lieberman) agreed to provide a mortgagee title insurance policy containing the standard exceptions for insuring that Rondinel-li’s interest was third (and not fourth) in priority to the owner. Unknown to Rondi-nelli, Lieberman failed to procure a policy of insurance, and Rondinelli seeks to recover against Safeco based upon a theory amounting to promissory estoppel, that is, Safeco should be estopped to deny liability because of an affirmative promise by its agent (Lieberman/Merit) upon which Ron-dinelli relied.

Rondinelli’s attempt to recover from Safeco…