Akin

Akin v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London

Good Law
140 Cal. App. 4th 291·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 856·2006 Daily Journal DAR 7267·44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 284·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5042
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2006E038354California2,417 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gaut, J.

1. Introduction

Plaintiff Jeanne Ruthann Akin filed a complaint for improper rescission against defendant Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London after defendant denied her homeowner’s insurance claims and rescinded her policies. The trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer on the grounds that contract damages were not available in a rescission action and plaintiff’s claim was barred by the one-year limitations period provided in the contract. On appeal, plaintiff argues that she was entitled to seek damages under Civil Code section 1692. Plaintiff also argues that her claim of improper rescission was not barred by the one-year limitations period.

We conclude the trial court properly granted the demurrer because plaintiff cannot recover damages under the policies in an action for rescission under section 1692. We also conclude that plaintiff’s claim was barred under the contractual one-year limitations period. We affirm the judgment.

2. Factual and Procedural History

Plaintiff had two homeowner’s insurance policies with Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London.

On March 4, 2004, plaintiff filed her original complaint alleging a breach of contract, breach of the duty…

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.