Randall J. Matsumoto, and Nancy E. Matsumoto v. Republic Insurance Company, and Blue Ridge Insurance Company

Good Law
792 F.2d 869·1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26241
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 19, 198685-5676California1,566 words

Opinion

Opinion

Randall and Nancy Matsumoto appeal from the district court’s order granting a motion for summary judgment in favor of Blue Ridge and Republic Insurance Companies (hereinafter referred to collectively as “Blue Ridge”). We review the order de novo, Nevada v. United States, 731 F.2d 633, 635 (9th Cir.1984), and affirm the decision of the district court.

I.

The Matsumotos, residents of California, bought a standard homeowners policy from Blue Ridge in April 1978. The standard policy specifically excludes from coverage “earth movement,” defined as “earthquake, landslide, mudflow, earth sinking, rising or shifting.” The California courts have construed that provision narrowly. Earth movement induced by third party negligence or some other non-excluded peril is covered by the standard policy. See Sabella v. Wisler, 59 Cal.2d 21, 30-34 , 27 Cal.Rptr. 689, 694-97 , 377 P.2d 889, 894-97 (1963); see also Premier Insurance Co. v. Welch, 140 Cal.App.3d 720, 724-26 , 189 Cal.Rptr. 657, 659-61 (1983).

The May 1978 collapse of a fence in their backyard alerted the Matsumotos to the subsidence of earth underlying their home. Mr. Matsumoto contacted Graham Rhodes, the independent agent from whom…

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.