Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Civil Service Employees Insurance

Good Law
108 Cal. Rptr. 737·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 869·33 Cal. App. 3d 26
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1973Civ. 13345California3,399 words

Opinion

Opinion

Janes, J.

This appeal involves a coverage dispute between a homeowner’s insurance carrier (plaintiff; hereinafter, “Hartford”) and an automobile insurance carrier (defendant; “Civil Service”).

The matter came before us upon a somewhat inconclusive record.. At the heart of the dispute is a claim made by Mrs. Elizabeth Ehrenburg that she suffered personal injury on October 24, 1966. As we hereafter show, her claim was settled by Hartford prior to trial, hence there has been no finding as to the facts underlying her claim. The coverage dispute was submitted to the trial court upon an agreed statement which recited inter alia that Mrs. Ehrenburg alleged to have been injured in the manner hereinafter described. The judgment from which plaintiff appeals was entered on findings which did not determine how (or whether) Mrs. Ehrenburg was injured; in this respect, the findings merely reiterated her allegations of the fact and manner of her injury. At oral argument in this court, however, counsel stipulated that Mrs. Ehrenburg suffered an injury in the manner and of the type alleged by her, and as more specifically described in depositions which are a part of the record on appeal. Our…

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.