Cocking

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Cocking

Good Law
173 Cal. Rptr. 846·1981 Cal. LEXIS 143·29 Cal. 3d 383·628 P.2d 1
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 21, 1981L. A. 31340California1,973 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richardson, J.

We resolve a constitutional challenge to section 11580.1, subdivision (c), of the Insurance Code (further statutory references are to that code unless otherwise indicated) which authorizes automobile liability insurers to exclude from coverage an insured’s bodily injury liability to any other person insured under the policy. As will appear, we conclude that the provision is valid.

Defendant Cecilia Glorious, wife of defendant Paul Cocking, was injured while she was a passenger in a car driven by him. She sued him for damages alleging that her injuries were caused by her husband’s negligence. Seeking to avoid indemnifying Cocking under the automobile liability policy which it had issued to him, plaintiff Farmers Insurance Exchange (Farmers) brought the present declaratory relief action. Farmers relied upon the following exclusion in its policy with Cocking: “[Tjhis policy does not apply under Part I (liability insurance) ... to the liability of any insured for bodily injury to (a) the named insured, or (b) a relative of the named insured who is a resident of the same household.” Another relevant provision of the policy provided that: “If the insured named in Item 1 of the…

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.