Truck Insurance Exchange v. Dynamic Concepts, Inc.
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…