Williams v. Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs Insurance Services of California Inc.

Good Law
177 Cal. App. 4th 624·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1496·98 Cal. Rptr. 3d 910
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 9, 2009B203691California7,888 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bendix, J.

SUMMARY

This case involves the liability of an insurance agency for negligence in advising on, procuring, and maintaining an insurance package for a new business venture that did not include workers’ compensation insurance. The lack of workers’ compensation insurance was discovered after an employee was injured in a catastrophic fire during the third year of business operations. After a lawsuit in which the employee obtained a multimillion dollar judgment against the owners of the business, this suit was filed by the owners against the insurance agency. The court, following a bench trial, found the insurance agency liable, and entered judgment in favor of the owners in the amount of the judgment that remained outstanding in the underlying case. The insurance agency appeals, claiming (1) the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of negligence on its part largely because the evidence did not support any duty owed to the insured, (2) the action was barred by the statute of limitations, and (3) the trial court erred in refusing to find comparative negligence on the part of the owners, who failed to read their insurance policies.

We find no error and affirm the…

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.