Cooper

Cooper v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Good Law
177 Cal. App. 4th 876·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1544·99 Cal. Rptr. 3d 870
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 17, 2009E047002California7,491 words

Opinion

Opinion

King, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

The present appeal is from a judgment entered after the trial court’s grant of defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s (State Farm) motion for nonsuit, following plaintiff’s opening statement.

Plaintiff and appellant Bryan Cooper was an insured of State Farm. He was involved in a single-car accident allegedly caused by a tread separation of the right rear tire. As part of the collision damage settlement with plaintiff, State Farm acquired possession of the vehicle, including the right rear tire. State Farm had the tire examined by an expert, who opined that it was defectively manufactured. State Farm notified plaintiff of its expert’s opinion. Plaintiff sued the tire manufacturer, Continental Tire North America, Inc. (Continental Tire).

After plaintiff’s counsel notified State Farm of the importance of the tire to plaintiff’s case against Continental Tire, and after State Farm informed plaintiff that it would retain the tire, State Farm disposed of the car and the allegedly defective tire. Plaintiff then sued State Farm for damages allegedly caused by State Farm’s destruction of the tire. Plaintiff contends that as a result of State…

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.