Yamamoto

Western Mutual Ins. Co. v. Yamamoto

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1118·29 Cal. App. 2d 1474·29 Cal. App. 4th 1474·35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 698·94 Daily Journal DAR 15613
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 3, 1994D017580California4,168 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haller, J.

This insurance declaratory relief action arises from an incident in which Anthony Yamamoto was shot by a minor, Bruce B. (Bruce), who used his father’s gun. Relying on factual findings of intentional conduct made in juvenile court and applying collateral estoppel, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Western Mutual Insurance Company (Western), the homeowners insurance carrier for Bruce’s family. Yamamoto, who was named as a defendant in the declaratory relief action, appeals. His principal contentions are the elements necessary to apply collateral estoppel did not exist, and, even if they did, findings in juvenile court should not be utilized in subsequent civil proceedings.

We find the trial court properly concluded the findings in juvenile court were binding on the parties to this action and, having made that determination, the trial court also correctly decided there was no coverage because the policy excluded coverage for “expected or intended” bodily injury.

Factual and Procedural Background

On November 2, 1990, at approximately 9:30 p.m., Yamamoto was skateboarding with a friend at a shopping center when a car drove into the parking lot. The car…

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.