Michael Dobson v. Twin City Fire Insurance

Good Law
590 F. App'x 687
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 15, 201512-56729California686 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Michael Dobson, Richard Teasta, Allen Braun, the Insureds, and Ironshore Indemnity, Inc., their excess carrier, appeal the district court’s summary judgment in favor of primary insurer Twin City Fire Insurance Co. and its parent The Hartford Financial Services Group, and the district court’s denial of their partial motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Reviewing both the grant and denial of summary judgment de novo, Padfield v. AIG Life Ins. Co., 290 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2002), and reviewing evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion and prejudice, Pyramid Techs., Inc. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co., 752 F.3d 807, 813 (9th Cir.2014), we reverse.

I. Policy Coverage for Invotex Action and Creditors Committee’s Claim

The district court correctly ruled that to the extent the underlying lawsuit against the Insureds sought restitution for fraudulent transfers rather than damages, such claims are not covered by the Twin City policy. Unified W. Grocers v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 457 F.3d 1106, 1115 (9th Cir.2006). To the extent the claims are based on allegations of “wilful act[s]” by, rather than negligence of, the Insureds,…

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.