Legal Opinion
Cumbre, Inc. v. State Compensation Insurance Fund
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 9, 2010No. E048799PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RAMIREZ, P. J.
Cumbre, Inc., and Coachella Valley Insurance Service, Inc. (Cumbre), acted as preferred brokers for the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) until 2003, when the Department of Insurance pressured SCIF to terminate unprofitable brokers. Because Cumbre’s loss ratio was consistently over 80 percent over a three-year period, its contract was terminated. Although SCIF gave brokers an opportunity to appeal the decision, Cumbre was unsuccessful in securing reinstatement because it would have had to exclude a substantial portion of its book of business to bring its loss ratio…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Krouse v. GrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Pinsker v. Pacific Coast Society of OrthodontistsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Thompson Pacific Construction Inc. v. City of SunnyvaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Potvin v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Fariba v. Dealer Services Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Trejo v. Johnson, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Cordero-Sacks v. Housing AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Allied Interstate Inc. v. Sessions Payroll Management, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012
- Trejo v. Johnson & JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Zuelke v. City of Modesto CA5California Court of Appeal · 2021