Legal Opinion

Allstate Insurance v. Mercury Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 5, 2007No. B189977PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GILBERT, P. J.

Insurance code section 11580.2, subdivision (d), provides that an insurance policy may require that uninsured motorist (UM) coverage be prorated when an insured has coverage under more than one UM policy.1 The section was designed to “avoid endless squabbles” engendered by claims made under multiple policies. (Wagner v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. (1985) 40 Cal.3d 460, 468 [220 Cal.Rptr. 659, 709 P.2d 462].)

Here the section did not achieve its goal. Two insurance companies make cogent arguments concerning the meaning of clauses pertaining to UM coverage in their…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Keel v. MFA Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1976
  2. American Automobile Insurance Co. v. Republic Indemnity Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
  3. County of San Diego v. Ace Property & Casualty InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Kobzoff v. Los Angeles County Harbor/UCLA Medical CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Scottsdale Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Mercury Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API