Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Bad Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 605·56 Cal. App. 4th 952·65 Cal. Rptr. 2d 821·97 Daily Journal DAR 9519·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5918
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 25, 1997B110170California3,702 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

This is a coverage dispute in which the insured (the Southern California Gas Company [SoCalGas]) contends the carrier (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London designated as Lowsley-Williams and Companies [Lowsley-Williams]) breached its duties to defend and indemnify SoCalGas in several environmental contamination actions. SoCalGas tendered the defense of the underlying actions to Lowsley-Williams, but Lowsley-Williams refused to defend or indemnify SoCalGas and this lawsuit followed. Lowsley-Williams moved for summary adjudication of issues, contending there was no possibility of coverage under the policies (and thus no duty to defend) because the coverage afforded under its policies was effective for “finite policy periods” during which SoCalGas had no insurable interest in the properties that are the subject of the underlying action and, therefore, no objectively reasonable expectation of coverage. Lowsley-Williams presented some evidence (discovery responses) addressing the insurable interest issue but it did not submit copies of the insurance policies or any evidence of the allegedly “finite” policy periods or of the terms and conditions of those policies. SoCalGas…

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.