Legal Opinion

Community Redevelopment Agency v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 29, 1996No. B077182PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

In this action, which appears to be the final part of a major and complex construction defect case, we are called upon to construe the provisions of an excess liability policy which calls for the application of the horizontal exhaustion rule. The precise question presented is whether an excess insurer, under policy provisions such as those presented here, has any obligation, in a continuing loss case, to “drop down” and provide a defense to a common insured before the liability limits of all primary insurers on the risk have been exhausted. Consistent with the horizontal…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Reserve Insurance Co. v. PisciottaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Admiral InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Lamb v. Belt Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
  4. Olympic Insurance v. Employers Surplus Lines InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  5. Peerless Casualty Co. v. Continental Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1956

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Reliance National Indemnity Co. v. General Star Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. LUDGATE INS. COMPANY, LTD v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. Qualcomm, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, LondonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  5. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. v. American Equity InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

40 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