Insurance Does Not Cover a Sure Thing

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gC_ym3gF and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gCF37aWz and at https://lnkd.in/gEf-yAff and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4700 posts.

Underwriting Against a Certain Loss and Claim is Appropriate

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gC_ym3gF and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gCF37aWz and at https://lnkd.in/gEf-yAff and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4700 posts.

Underwriting Against a Certain Loss and Claim is Appropriate

The underwriting of an insurance policy requires evaluation of risks of loss faced by the proposed insured. When a proposed insured advises the underwriter that it has received an intent to sue from customers of the insured a prudent underwriter will exclude the known risk faced by the Sunnyside Mobile Estate was excluded.

California Capital Insurance Company (CCIC), who defended and indemnified its insured Sunnyside Mobile Estates appealed from a judgment rendered in favor of Gotham Insurance Company (Gotham) on CCIC’s complaint for equitable contribution toward funds it paid.

In California Capital Insurance Company v. Gotham Insurance Company, F084350, California Court of Appeals, Fifth District (November 6, 2023) the Court of Appeals interpreted the competing insurance policies.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On April 8, 2016, mobilehome park residents, by and through one of the residents, sent Ormond a Notice of Intention to Commence Action dated March 1, 2016 (the “notice of intention to sue”) pursuant to the Mobilehome Residency Law (MRL).

Equitable contribution apportions costs among insurers sharing the same level of liability on the same risk.

The Ormond Insureds’ Insurance and Their Tender of Defense and Indemnity of the Alonso Action to CCIC and Gotham

The Gotham policy contained an endorsement titled “Failure to Maintain Exclusion, Mobile Home Parks-California” addressed in the notice of intention to sue.

Moreover, each and every cause of action asserted in the Alonso complaint was premised, at least in part, on provisions of the MRL.

As the California Supreme Court has said, “where there is no duty to defend, there cannot be a duty to indemnify.”

ZALMA OPINION

If Sunnyside Mobile Estates did not tell Gotham of the notice of intent to sue Gotham could have rescinded the policy for misrepresentation of material facts. Sunnyside did not and, as a result, Gotham excluded the type of loss that resulted in the Alonso suit. CCIC knew about the loss before its policy expired and Gotham knew of it before it happened and the Alonso suit was filed before the inception of the policy. There was no equity involved in this attempt at equitable indemnity and CCIC attempted to force Gotham to pay that which it did not owe.

(c) 2023 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Go to Newsbreak.com https://lnkd.in/g8azKc34; Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gcZKhG6g; https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYkxD.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Go to Newsbreak.com https://lnkd.in/g8azKc34; Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gcZKhG6g; https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYkxD.