Baron v. Fire Insurance Exchange
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ELIA, J.
After a jury trial, appellant Fire Insurance Exchange (Fire) was found to have intentionally concealed and misrepresented an important fact and to have unreasonably failed to investigate and pay a claim covered under a fire insurance policy. On appeal, Fire contends that the judgment should be reversed because the appointment of respondent James H. Baron as receiver for the insured property was void or at least invalid for purposes of recovering punitive damages. Notwithstanding the righteous, histrionic tone of respondent’s brief, we find no error in the trial court’s judgment…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brandt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Reichert v. General Insurance of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Cassim v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Shade Foods, Inc. v. Innovative Products Sales & Marketing, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Murphy v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. IbarraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007