Ranger Pipelines, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance

MEMORANDUM

Ranger Pipelines, Inc. appeals from an order of the district court dismissing its complaint for failure to state a claim for relief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court correctly concluded that the First Amended Complaint’s (FAC) allegations established that the suit was time barred. See Sams v. Yahoo! Inc., 713 F.3d 1175, 1179 (9th Cir.2013). Ranger Pipelines does not dispute that the insurance policy at issue contained a suit limitation provision requiring an insured to bring suit within one year of discovering the loss. Ranger Pipelines also does not dispute that the FAC’s allegations established that it failed to comply with this requirement.

Ranger Pipelines argues, however, that the FAC adequately alleged that the limitation period was equitably tolled. We reject this argument. Under California law, the one-year limitation period is tolled “from the time an insured gives notice of the damage to his insurer, pursuant to applicable policy notice provisions, until coverage is denied.” Prudential-LMI Commercial Ins. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 674, 693 , 274 Cal.Rptr. 387 , 798 P.2d 1230 (1990). The FAC contained a…