Atlantic Mutual Insurance v. J. Lamb, Inc.

Good Law
100 Cal. App. 4th 1017·123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 256·2 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6984
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 1, 2002B150674, B151708California10,473 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

The primary issue presented by these consolidated appeals concerns the existence of coverage under a liability policy for a claim based upon disparaging statements allegedly made by the insured about a third party’s business and products.

The plaintiff and respondent, Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company (Atlantic Mutual), filed this action for declaratory relief seeking a determination that there was no coverage under its policy. The trial court agreed with Atlantic Mutual’s position and the defendants and appellants, J. Lamb, Inc. (Lamb), and Granite State Insurance Company (Granite State), appeal from the summary judgment entered against them. Lamb was the insured in successive years under policies issued by Atlantic Mutual and Granite State and claims that it is entitled to recover under the Atlantic Mutual policy even though it has already settled the same claim with Granite State. Granite State, on the other hand, claims that Atlantic Mutual is liable to it for equitable contribution and/or subrogation and such claim is not precluded by its prior settlement with Lamb.

Because we conclude that the disparaging statements published by Lamb fall within the very broad…

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.