Eott Energy Corp. v. Storebrand International Insurance

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 450·45 Cal. App. 4th 565·52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 894·96 Daily Journal DAR 5643·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3527
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 1996B089217California4,972 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

This case presents the question of whether an insured, having suffered a $1.5 million loss as the result of over 650 thefts of the petroleum products which it markets, will be entitled to recover for such loss under its “all risk” property insurance policy when the value of the property taken in any single theft did not exceed the $100,000 deductible provided for in the policy. The issue which we are required to resolve is whether, under the facts of this case, there was but one “occurrence” or over 650 of them.

The insured appellant, EOTT Energy Corp. (EOTT), claims that the multiple thefts were in reality an integral part of a long-standing, organized conspiracy which resulted in a systematic theft of its oil products and thus amounted to only one occurrence to which a single deductible should be applied. Because we conclude that (1) a planned and orchestrated theft of EOTT’s products (if that is in fact what happened) would amount to one loss to which a single deductible should apply and (2) EOTT raised triable issues of fact as to whether such a conspiracy existed, we reverse the summary judgment granted in favor of the respondent insurer, Storebrand International…

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.