Crab Boat Owners Ass'n v. Hartford Insurance Co. of the Midwest

Good Law
325 F. Supp. 2d 1057·2004 WL 1622044·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13481
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 20, 2004C 03-05417 MHPCalifornia3,429 words

Opinion

Opinion

Patel, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Motion to Dismiss

On October 30, 2003, plaintiffs Crab Boat Owners Association, Robert Miller, Larry Collins, and John Tarantino filed a complaint alleging that Hartford Insurance Company’s refusal to defend plaintiffs in a separate lawsuit before this court — namely Dooley et al. v. Crab Boat Owners Association et al., C 02-0676 MHP — constituted a breach of its insurance contract and a violation of the contract’s implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The underlying action involves a combination of antitrust and intentional tort claims arising out of plaintiffs’ alleged attempts to restrict trade and to fix the price of Dungeness crab at artificially high levels. Defendants have now filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint. Having read the parties’ papers and considered their arguments, the court hereby enters the following memorandum and order.

BACKGROUND

Defendants insured plaintiffs under a standard Comprehensive General Liability (CGL) policy, which protects against bodily injury or property damage caused by “occurrences.” Def.’s Mot., Ex.l.A, at 1. The policy defines “occurrence” as “an accident, including continuous or repeated…

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.