Burns

Burns v. California Fair Plan Ass'n

Good Law
152 Cal. App. 4th 646·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1032·61 Cal. Rptr. 3d 809
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 25, 2007B192590California4,575 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kriegler, J.

The holder of a life estate on a residence and a trust holding the remainder interest separately purchased fire insurance policies on the dwelling from different insurance companies. When the home was destroyed by fire, the life tenant and the trust brought this action, seeking to each obtain the full value of the residence on their respective insurance policies, a total amount in excess of the damage to the residence. Invoking the “other insurance” provision of each policy, the insurers moved for summary judgment on the basis that they had fulfilled their contractual obligations by paying the life tenant and the trust on a pro rata basis according to the value of their insured interests in the destroyed property. We hold that multiple insureds cannot recover more than the value of the property destroyed on a fire insurance claim resulting from a single occurrence. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the insurers.

FACTS

Ann Bums held a life estate in the residence located at 707 Valparaiso Drive, Claremont. Mitchell Weiss was a tmstee of the Kent Bums Trust (the Tmst), which held the remainder interest in the property. Bums…

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.