Legal Opinion

Mead Reinsurance Co. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 23, 1986No. E003251PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McDANIEL, J.

In these original proceedings, petitioners, who are defendants and insurers in the underlying “bad-faith” action, brought against them by the insured plaintiff, City of Laguna Beach (City), are challenging the respondent court’s order which granted City’s motion to compel discovery. The order requires production of defendant Mead’s “claims files relating to every claim similar to the claim at issue. . . made during the period starting from January 1, 1979, and extending to the present [June 4, 1985] . . ."

Defendants, in asserting their challenge in these proceedings to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pitchess v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  2. West Pico Furniture Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  4. State ex rel. Department of Transportation v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Nelson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. StephensWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. North River Ins. Co. v. Mayor and City Council of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  3. Cook v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1990
  4. Leeson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1989
  5. North River Ins. Co. v. Mayor and City Council of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API