Dutton Dredge Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

The plaintiff commenced an action to recover damages for breach of an alleged contract under the terms of w'hieh the defendant undertook to keep the plaintiff covered with compensation insurance. The defendant answered and the action was tried before the trial court sitting with a jury. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and from the judgment entered thereon the defendant has appealed.

After the plaintiff had filed its complaint the defendant commenced an action to obtain a writ of prohibition to restrain the trial court from further proceeding with the trial. The writ was denied. (United States F. & G. Co. v. Superior Court, 214 Cal. 468 [ 6 Pac. (2d) 243 ].) The nature of the complaint of the plaintiff in the instant case is quite fully set forth in that decision.

1. The defendant asserts that the evidence does not support the verdict. It claims that parol contracts of insurance must be clearly and convincingly established in every particular or the courts will refuse any relief. It cites American C. Co. v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 12 Cal. App. 133 [ 106 Pac. 720 ]. That was an action on an alleged parol contract of insurance. The instant case is one for…