Upasani

Upasani v. State Farm General Ins. Co. CA4/3

Good Law
173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 784·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 569·227 Cal. App. 4th 509·2014 WL 2885928
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 6, 2014G048399California4,976 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

Introduction

Meera Upasani and Mohan Upasani, policyholders of State Farm General Insurance Company and State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (collectively, State Farm), were sued for conspiring to aid a mother in abducting her son from his father. State Farm denied the Upasanis’ tender of the defense of that action because abduction claims were not covered claims under the terms of the State Farm policies. The Upasanis sued, and the trial court granted State Farm’s motion for summary judgment.

We affirm. State Farm offered admissible evidence showing the claimed loss suffered in the underlying case was not within the insuring agreement. The Upasanis failed to establish a triable issue of material fact.

Statement of Facts and Procedural History

Avinash Kulkami filed a lawsuit against the Upasanis, among others, for violation of Civil Code section 49, subdivision (a), negligence per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, arid negligent infliction of emotional distress. Kulkarni alleged the Upasanis conspired with Kulkami’s wife to abduct Kulkarni’s infant son to India. A jury returned a special verdict in favor of the Upasanis. Kulkarni appealed from 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.