Baldwin

Baldwin v. AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Insurance Exchange

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 5th 545·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 576·204 Cal. Rptr. 3d 433
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 13, 2016A142217California5,666 words

Opinion

Opinion

McGUINESS, J.

Plaintiff William Baldwin (Appellant) appeals from the judgment dismissing with prejudice his complaint against defendant AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Insurance Exchange (AAA), after AAA’s demurrer was sustained without leave to amend. Appellant contends he stated valid causes of action against AAA for breach of contract and bad faith because AAA refused to fully compensate him for collision-related damages to his vehicle as required under his insurance policy and under the insurance policy of a driver involved in the collision. Lor the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

As this is an appeal from an order sustaining AAA’s demurrer, in the factual summary that follows we accept as true the facts alleged in the complaint and the attached exhibit. (Westamerica Bank v. City of Berkeley (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 598, 607 [ 133 Cal.Rptr.3d 883 ].)

Appellant’s almost new Toyota Tundra pickup (pickup) sustained structural damage, while parked, as a result of a collision between the vehicles of defendants Mark Rivera Hollandsworth and Peter Bona Sebastian. Appellant had an insurance policy through AAA covering…

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.