Shepard

Shepard v. Calfarm Life Insurance

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 555·5 Cal. App. 4th 1067·7 Cal. Rptr. 2d 428·92 Daily Journal DAR 5663·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3627
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 27, 1992D013743California4,223 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

Bruce Alexander Shepard, through his guardian ad litem and wife Catherine E. Shepard, and Mrs. Shepard (the Shepards) appeal the judgment granting declaratory relief in favor of defendant and respondent CalFarm Life Insurance Company (CalFarm) to the effect that a Medicare supplement provision in the Shepards’ health insurance policy, transferring them to a different plan, was enforceable and the Shepards were not entitled to continued health care coverage as they claimed. Because the trial court found no breach of contract on the part of CalFarm, the Shepards’ remaining causes of action for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing were found to be moot and judgment was entered accordingly.

Pursuant to our duty to construe the documents containing these policy provisions independently as a matter of law, we have concluded the Medicare supplement provision is ambiguous and thus must be construed against the insurer, resulting in the provision of coverage to the Shepards under their existing policy, Plan P. We also conclude the reduction in policy coverage purportedly effected by the transfer provision was not sufficiently clear…

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.