Legal Opinion

Karen Kane Inc. v. Reliance Insurance Company, a Corporation, Opinion

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 2, 2000No. 98-55589PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:

We must decide, under California law, whether an insurer for incidents of employee dishonesty properly refused to pay the coverage limit for the first two of three separate one-year policy periods, in connection with an employee’s fraudulent scheme that spanned all three periods.

I

Karen Kane, Inc. (“Kane”), a California corporation, is a Los Angeles-based apparel manufacturer. Rebanee Insurance Company (“Reliance”) is a Pennsylvania corporation authorized to sell insurance in the State of California. Reliance issued Kane a package of commercial insurance policies…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Continental Casualty Co. v. Phoenix Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Prudential-LMI Commercial Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. James B. Lunsford Regina T. Charboneau Bay Vista Enterprises, Inc. v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  4. Stonewall Insurance v. City of Palos Verdes EstatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. A.B.S. Clothing Collection, Inc. v. Home InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Antonio Hinojos v. Kohl's CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  2. Pacheco v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  3. Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. DGG & Car, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Madison Materials Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
  5. Spartan Iron & Metal Corp. v. Liberty InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2001

26 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