Legal Opinion
Aim Insurance Co. v. Culcasi
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 10, 1991No. H006828PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CAPACCIOLI, Acting P. J.
Statement of the Case
Defendant James Culcasi (Culcasi), doing business as Rosine’s, a restaurant, appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court granted plaintiff Aim Insurance Company’s (Aim) motion for summary judgment. He claims the court erred in granting the motion. We affirm the judgment.
Scope of Review
The trial court may properly grant a motion for summary judgment only if there are no triable issues of fact and, as a matter of law, the moving party is entitled to judgment. (Blankenheim v. E. F. Hutton & Co. (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 1463, 1470 [266…
2Cases cited72 opinions
- Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
- AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- D'AMICO v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Molien v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Reserve Insurance Co. v. PisciottaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Trinity Universal Insurance Co. v. CowanTexas Supreme Court · 1997
- Voorhees v. Preferred Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- SL Industries, Inc. v. American Motorists InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- Chatton v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- B & E Convalescent Center v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.