Nafsu

Nafsu v. Hurd

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 426·84 Cal. App. 4th 1103
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 14, 2001D035536California2,467 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

In this case, we decide that the litigation privilege set forth in Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b) (all statutory references are to the Civil Code unless otherwise specified) does not bar rescission of a settlement when the settlement was based on a misrepresentation of the applicable insurance policy limits.

The facts underlying the parties' dispute are relatively simple, although the procedural history of this case is somewhat convoluted. In accordance with the rules applicable to appellate review of a ruling on demurrer, the factual recitation is based on the allegations of Nafsu's second amended complaint. ( E.g., Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 966-967 , 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 92 , 831 P.2d 317 .)

Steven Michael Hurd shot Salwan Nafsu in the leg during an altercation at a Red Lion Hotel in San Diego. In July 1994, Nafsu filed this action, asserting claims for assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Hurd and negligence against Red Lion (doing business as Red Lion Hotel/San Diego) and its security company, the Richman Management Corporation (doing business as Heritage Security Service (hereafter…

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.