Legal Opinion

Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co. v. SMG Holdings, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 30, 2020No. C082841Published

1Opinion of the Court

Filed 12/31/19 Certified for Publication 1/28/20 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ---- PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE C082841 COMPANY, (Super. Ct. No. Plaintiff and Appellant, 34201600192456CUPTGDS) v. SMG HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant and Respondent. This case concerns whether a binding arbitration clause in an insurance policy issued by plaintiff Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., applies to a third party, defendant SMG Holdings, Inc. The trial court ruled it does not. We conclude it does. The policy had been issued to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Arthur Andersen LLP v. CarlisleSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass'n v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  3. McGill v. Citibank, N.A.California Supreme Court · 2017
  4. Kevin Comer v. Micor, Inc. Kenneth C. Smith Elliot H. Wagner Barbara Arbucci, and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  5. Casa Herrera, Inc. v. BeydounCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API