Legal Opinion
Watamura v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 3, 1988No. B033004PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ASHBY, Acting P. J.
Plaintiff and appellant Ronald Watamura was insured under a homeowner’s insurance policy with defendant and respondent State Farm Fire and Casualty Company. Respondent denied a property loss claim under the policy, and appellant brought this action for a breach of contract and bad faith, We hold the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of respondent on the ground that the loss was excluded by clear and unambiguous terms of the policy, and appellant raised no triable issues of material fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c.)
Appellant’s “sandrail vehicle”…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Producers Dairy Delivery Co. v. Sentry InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Wolf MacHinery Co. v. Insurance of North AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Roug v. Ohio Security InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tenos v. State Farm InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Inglewood Radiology Medical Group, Inc. v. Hospital Shared Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1989
- Blevins v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1998
- Tenos v. State Farm InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Van Ness & Sperry, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of PittsburghCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992