Morris

Morris v. Paul Revere Life Insurance Co.

Good Law
109 Cal. App. 4th 966·135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 718·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 863·2003 Daily Journal DAR 6476·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5106
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 2003G030567California4,093 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bedsworth, J.

Plaintiff Martin J. Morris appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company. Morris alleged that Revere acted in bad faith in denying his claim for benefits under his disability policy. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Revere, concluding that its interpretation of the policy language and the California statute governing incontestability clauses in disability insurance policies was reasonable in light of the evolving state of the law. We agree and affirm the judgment.

Revere issued disability policies to Morris in 1989 and 1990. Among the policies’ coverage limitations was one for disabilities caused by a “sickness or disease which first manifests itself after the Date of Issue and while Your Policy is in force.”

The policies also included an incontestability clause, as required by California Insurance Code section 10350.2, which provided: “a. After Your Policy has been in force for 2 years, excluding any time You are Disabled, We cannot contest the statements in the application, [f] b. No claim for loss incurred or Disability that starts after 2 years from the Date of Issue will be reduced or denied because a…

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.