Harrison v. Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
LYNCH, District Judge.
I. SUMMARY
This case raises the issue of whether an insurance policy may be effectively rescinded if the insurer takes the requisite steps under Cal.Civ.Code section 1691, governing the requirements for effecting rescission of a contract, where the insurance policy contains an “incontestability clause.” However, because the parties failed to stipulate whether the contested rescission took place during the contestability period or after its expiration, and it is not clear whether that fact is disputed, the Court may only decide certain of the issues.
II. BACKGROUND
The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mt. Hawley Insurance v. Federal Savings & Loan InsuranceDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1987
- De Campos v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Ito v. WatanabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Meyer v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Cole v. CalawayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Atmel Corp. v. St. Paul Fire & MarineDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2005
- Wong v. StolerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015