Legal Opinion

Mez Industries, Inc. v. Pacific National Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 21, 1999No. B121209PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

This case presents the question of whether a liability insurer providing coverage for “advertising injury” is required to defend its insured in an action charging the insured with inducement of patent infringement. When the respondent, Pacific National Insurance Company (Pacific) refused to provide such a defense to the appellant, Mez Industries, Inc. (Mez), Mez filed this action for declaratory relief and breach of contract. The trial court sustained Pacific’s demurrer without leave to amend and thereafter entered a judgment of dismissal.

Because we conclude that the…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Bank of the West v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  4. AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Mt. Hawley Insurance v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  2. Shafer v. Berger, Kahn, Shafton, Moss, Figler, Simon & GladstoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  3. Homedics, Inc. v. Valley Forge Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. California Amplifier, Inc. v. RLI Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 2001
  5. Heritage Mutual Insurance v. Advanced Polymer Technology, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2000

28 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