RLI Ins. Co. v. CNA CAS. OF CALIFORNIA

Good Law
141 Cal. App. 4th 75·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1044·2006 Daily Journal DAR 8948·45 Cal. Rptr. 3d 667·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6125
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 2006B184637California2,953 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boren, J.

A primary insurer and an excess insurer each paid $1 million to settle a claim against their insured, who was involved in a fatal traffic accident. After the case against the insured settled, the excess insurer brought this equitable subrogation action against the primary insurer, alleging that the primary insurer unreasonably refused an offer to settle the tort claim against the insured for an amount within the primary insurer’s $1 million policy limit.

The trial court correctly granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of the primary insurer. The excess insurer cannot maintain a subrogation action against the primary insurer, based on an unreasonable refusal to settle the underlying tort claim, because the tort claim did not go to trial, and no excess judgment was entered against the insured. We decline to follow a contrary rule set forth in Fortman v. Safeco Ins. Co. (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 1394 [ 271 Cal.Rptr. 117 ] (Fortman).

FACTS

Appellant RLI Insurance Company and respondent CNA Casualty of California are liability insurers for Jim Aartman, Inc. (Aartman). CNA provides Aartman with $1 million in primary coverage under a general liability policy. RLI provides…

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.