Legal Opinion
Courtesy Ambulance Service v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 21, 1992No. E010816PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DABNEY, J.
The question presented in this original proceeding is whether the State Compensation Insurance Fund (hereinafter SCIF), when sued in tort, can be held liable for punitive damages. We conclude that it can, and that the trial court accordingly erred in granting SCIF’s motion to strike the request for such damages from the complaint.
The facts of the case—or, more properly, the allegations of the complaint—need not be recited in detail. Petitioner Courtesy Ambulance Service of San Bernardino (hereinafter Courtesy) has been for several years insured for workers’ compensation…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Lungren v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- People v. Lance W.California Supreme Court · 1985
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Careau & Co. v. Security Pacific Business Credit, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1990
- People v. Eric J.California Supreme Court · 1979
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Tudor Ranches, Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Community Memorial Hospital v. County of VenturaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Notrica v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Home Ins. Co. v. Zurich Insurance CompanyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Security Officers Service, Inc. v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.