Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Imperial Casualty & Indemnity Co.

Good Law
176 Cal. App. 3d 622·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2464·222 Cal. Rptr. 115
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 1986B004413California1,903 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aisenson, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the trial court. Judgment affirmed.

In this dispute involving three insurance companies, the trial court ruled that both defendants/appellants, under their policies of professional liability insurance in force at the time that the claim was made, were responsible for indemnifying and defending the insureds. The court, further, required defendants/appellants to reimburse plaintiff/respondent its contributive share of costs for defending and indemnifying the insureds where said plaintiff/respondent was the insureds’ carrier at the time the acts complained of occurred.

The controversy is framed by three aspects of the contesting insurance policies which raise the questions: (I) whether appellants’ and respondent’s policies constitute similar insurance; (II) whether the entities or persons insured are the same; and (III) whether there is an overlap of coverage.

The material facts herein were submitted to the trial court by stipulation and are not in dispute. John K. Dees (Dees), formerly a partner in the accounting firm of Grant, Dotson, Kellogg & Dees (GDK & D), on or about May 24, 1972, certified the consolidated financial statement…

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.