Swanson

Swanson v. State Farm General Insurance

Good Law
162 Cal. Rptr. 3d 477·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 759·219 Cal. App. 4th 1153·2013 WL 5308877
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 23, 2013B240016California6,140 words

Opinion

Opinion

Segal, J.

INTRODUCTION

An insurer agrees to provide a defense with a reservation of rights and approves independent counsel selected by the insured to represent the insured in an underlying tort action, pursuant to Civil Code section 2860 and San Diego Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Society, Inc. (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 358 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 494 ] (Cumis). The insurer subsequently withdraws all reservations of rights and coverage defenses that give rise to the insured’s right to Cumis counsel. Must the insurer continue to pay the insured’s Cumis counsel after the insurer’s withdrawal of the Cumis-triggering reservations eliminated the conflict that created the need for Cumis counsel? We answer this question in the negative.

Plaintiff Terry Ann Swanson appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court had granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of defendant State Farm General Insurance Company (State Farm). The trial court determined that State Farm did not breach its insurance contract with Swanson by refusing to pay any attorneys’ fees incurred by her Cumis counsel after State Farm withdrew its reservation of rights. We affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

State Farm issued…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.