Nissel v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, J.
The plaintiff and appellant, Raphael Nissel, doing business as Raphy Diamonds (hereinafter, Nissel), appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant and respondent, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London (hereinafter, Lloyd’s). Lloyd’s had issued a jeweler’s block policy to Nissel which included coverage for losses suffered as a result of theft but expressly excluded losses from an “unattended” vehicle. As we conclude that the record demonstrates that (1) there is no dispute that the loss for which Nissel sought recovery under the policy was one falling…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Waller v. Truck Insurance Exchange, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
- Bank of the West v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Union Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Cooper Companies, Inc. v. Transcontinental InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- E.M.M.I. Inc. v. Zurich American InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Atlantic Mutual Insurance v. J. Lamb, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2002
- Brian A. Buckley v. C.A. Terhune, Director of the California Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- American Alternative Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Strassburg v. Citizens State BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.