Central National Insurance v. Superior Court

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 59·2 Cal. App. 4th 926·3 Cal. Rptr. 2d 622·92 Daily Journal DAR 561
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 1992A053294California2,469 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dossee, J.

Summary

By a petition for writ of mandate, Central National Insurance Company seeks to compel respondent, County of San Mateo Superior Court, to grant its motion for summary judgment.

Central National is the defendant in a suit brought by real parties in interest, Charles and Patricia Spindt, for breach of an insurance contract and various tort theories following Central National’s refusal to pay the Spindts’ claim for the settling and cracking of the foundation and walls of their house.

We initially denied the petition; however, the Supreme Court returned the matter to us with citation to Prudential-LMI Com. Insurance v. Superior Court (1990) 51 Cal.3d 674, 684-699 [ 274 Cal.Rptr. 387 , 798 P.2d 1230 ] (Prudential-LMI), and with directions that we issue an alternative writ directing the trial court to show cause why it should not grant the motion for summary judgment on the grounds that “as a matter of law (1) the suit was untimely and/or (2) the loss claimed is not properly allocable to petitioner’s policy.” We complied.

As will be seen, we hold (1) that there are triable issues of fact concerning whether a reasonable insured, with a specified peril policy like that…

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.