Legal Opinion
Rose v. Royal Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 16, 1991No. B052014PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LILLIE, P.
Pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580, Harold B. Rose and Eleanor Rose sued Royal Insurance Company of America as judgment creditors of Norman Hahn and Jean Hahn, who were insured under a policy of liability insurance issued by it. Plaintiffs appeal from judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer to the first amended complaint without leave to amend.
Facts
The first amended complaint (complaint) alleged: On March 15, 1980, defendant issued to the Hahns an insurance policy (the policy), effective through March 15, 1983, which included…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Insurance Co. of the West v. Haralambos Beverage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- Hynding v. Home Accident InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Val's Painting & Drywall, Inc. v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Shade Foods, Inc. v. Innovative Products Sales & Marketing, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- City of Atascadero v. Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Pruyn v. Agricultural InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Marshall v. Gibson, Dunn & CrutcherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Xebec Development Partners, Ltd. v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.