Valentine

Valentine v. Membrila Insurance Services, Inc.

Good Law
118 Cal. App. 4th 462·13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 125·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 701·2004 Daily Journal DAR 5558·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4006
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 10, 2004B160568California6,101 words

Opinion

Opinion

Curry, J.

Appellants Jose and Teresa Martinez, their corporation Martinez Enterprises, Inc. (jointly referred to herein as the Martinezes), and their assignee Alma Valentine appeal from a judgment rendered on their negligence claim against their insurance broker, Membrila Insurance Services, Inc. (Membrila). The comprehensive general liability (CGL) insurance policy procured by Membrila for the nightclub owned by the Martinezes contained a broad assault and battery exclusion. In 1998, Valentine was shot and seriously injured when leaving the nightclub and sued the Martinezes, a litigation that was resolved by a $6 million stipulated judgment containing a covenant not to execute. Appellants then brought suit against Membrila and the insurance company that issued the Martinezes’ policy for breach of their respective duties. The insurer ultimately settled, and the matter proceeded to a bench trial as to Membrila only. The court found that Membrila had committed broker negligence, but awarded no damages due to offsets charged against the award.

Appellants contend that the trial court erred in ruling that Membrila’s liability was limited to the $1 million in coverage that would have…

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.