Davis

Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. v. Davis

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 830·37 Cal. App. 4th 1432·44 Cal. Rptr. 2d 546·44 Cal. Rptr. 546·95 Daily Journal DAR 11525
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 1995A064113California3,445 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perley, J.

Defendant and appellant Lester Davis (Davis) appeals from a judgment after trial by the court, in a declaratory relief action, that he was not insured under the commercial general liability policy, No. 2 95 MZX 80232301 (policy) issued by plaintiff and respondent Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (Fireman’s Fund). The basis for the judgment was a finding of fact by the trial court that, at all material times Davis was not an “employee” of any entity insured by the policy. Other issues involving whether Davis was insured by the policy were severed and reserved for later decision.

Davis contends: (1) the declaratory relief action was moot; (2) Fireman’s Fund is precluded by judicial admission or estoppel from denying coverage; (3) Davis was an employee; and (4) at all material times, Davis was acting within the scope of his employment. We affirm. Based on our conclusion that Davis was at all times an independent contractor, we find it unnecessary to address the fourth contention.

I. Relevant Facts

A. Background and the Policy

From November 1987 through January 1988, Arthur Meyer conducted business through various corporations. Meyer was an officer, director, shareholder…

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.