Pugh

Pugh v. State Farm Ins. Companies

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 126·227 Cal. App. 3d 816·278 Cal. Rptr. 149·91 Daily Journal DAR 2019·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1205
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 1991H007242California2,451 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cottle, J.

Defendant State Farm Insurance Companies (State Farm) appeals from a judgment confirming an arbitration award rendered in favor of its insured, plaintiff Emma Pugh, on her uninsured motorist claim. The award followed binding arbitration ordered after Pugh filed a petition to compel arbitration in the superior court. State Farm opposed the petition on grounds the one-year statute of limitations had passed. Pugh claimed the limitations period was tolled because State Farm did not provide her with written notice of the limitations period 30 days prior to its expiration. (See Ins. Code, § 11580.2, subd. (k).) State Farm claimed it did not need to provide her with notice because it received oral notification that she was represented by counsel. An insurer is not required to notify its insured of the applicable statute of limitations “if the insurer has received notice that the insured is represented by an attorney.” (§ 11580.2, subd. (k).)

The trial court granted Pugh’s petition, ruling that notice of attorney representation must be in writing to absolve the insurer of its statutory duty to notify the insured. On appeal from the judgment confirming the arbitrator’s award,…

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.