Legal Opinion

State of Cal. v. Continental Insurance

California Supreme Court

Decided August 9, 2012No. S170560PublishedCited by 83 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CHIN, J.

This case considers complex questions of insurance policy coverage interpretation in connection with a federal court-ordered cleanup of the state’s Stringfellow Acid Pits waste site. We initially address the “ ‘continuous injury’ trigger of coverage,” as that principle was explained in Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Admiral Ins. Co. (1995) 10 Cal.4th 645, 655 [42 Cal.Rptr.2d 324, 913 P.2d 878] (Montrose) and the “all sums” rule adopted in Aerojet-General Corp. v. Transport Indemnity Co. (1997) 17 Cal.4th 38, 55-57 [70 Cal.Rptr.2d 118, 948 P.2d 909] (Aerojet), and conclude that the…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Waller v. Truck Insurance Exchange, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Bank of the West v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. Allstate InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Admiral InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by83 opinions

  1. T.H. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  2. The Matter of Viking Pump Inc. and Warren Pumps LLCNew York Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. Williams Hicks v. Pga Tour, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  4. Fluor Corporation v. Super. Ct.California Supreme Court · 2015
  5. State v. Cont'l Ins. Co., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017

78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API