Truck Insurance Exchange v. Dynamic Concepts, Inc.

Good Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 2d 873·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1134·9 Cal. App. 4th 1147·92 Daily Journal DAR 12988·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7997
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 21, 1992G011463California1,006 words

Opinion

Opinion

Crosby, J.

Truck Insurance Exchange appeals from the denial of its petition to compel binding arbitration to resolve a dispute with its insured, Dynamic Concepts, Inc. We again reject Dynamic’s request to dismiss the appeal and affirm on the merits.

I

Dynamic, named as a defendant in a federal lawsuit, immediately tendered its defense to Truck. Truck promptly accepted the defense under a reservation of rights and selected a law firm to defend its insured. Dynamic refused the insurer’s designation of counsel, hired an attorney, and demanded that Truck pay the fees.

Truck declined, noting it “fail[ed] to see any conflict with respect to the defense of our insured in this action and, therefore, [did] not recognize this as a Cumis situation.” Dynamic filed a complaint for bad faith insurance practices and declaratory relief. Truck quickly responded with a petition to compel arbitration.

Truck contended Dynamic’s suit was nothing more than a “dispute concerning attorney’s fees [which, per the mandates of Civil Code section 2860, subdivision (c),] shall be resolved by final and binding arbitration by a single neutral arbitrator selected by the parties to the dispute.” Dynamic…

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.