Legal Opinion

Ponder v. Blue Cross of Southern California

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 4, 1983No. Civ. 66903PublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

This appeal is from a summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurance company, Blue Cross of Southern California (Blue Cross). The plaintiffs, Marlene and Tommie Ponder, are policyholders denied coverage for treatment of a condition suffered by Mrs. Ponder. In response to this refusal, the Ponders filed a complaint seeking declaratory relief as well as damages for breach of contract and tortious breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The court granted summary judgment on grounds a provision in the insurance contract effectively ex- eluded Mrs.…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Parsons v. Bristol Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Steven v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.California Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Crane v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.California Supreme Court · 1971
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. JacoberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973

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

3Cited by75 opinions

  1. Fu-Kong Tzung Jean Tzung v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, and Does 1 Through 100, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
  2. MacKinnon v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Helmick v. Potomac Edison Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Haynes v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Delgado v. Heritage Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

70 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