State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Vue Pao Yang

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 495·35 Cal. App. 4th 563·41 Cal. Rptr. 2d 210·95 Daily Journal DAR 7137·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4091
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 1995No. F021542California4,371 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ardaiz, J.

*566 Opinion

Appellant Vue Pao Yang was insured by respondent State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. State Farm brought a declaratory relief action against Yang and sought an adjudication that Yang was not covered by the “Uninsured Motor Vehicle” and “Medical Payments” coverages of his State Farm automobile insurance policy for damages he suffered as a result of being shot by a gunman who fired from a car and then sped away. Yang had been standing near his apartment at the time of the shooting. The trial court found no coverage and entered judgment in favor of State Farm.

Facts

The facts of the case are not in dispute. The parties agreed that the facts were those testified to by Yang at his deposition and as set forth in a police report of the incident.

The incident occurred on December 27, 1991. On that day Yang, who was 21 years old, had attended a Hmong New Year celebration at the Fresno County fairgrounds. He and his brother-in-law had driven to the fairgrounds at about 1 p.m. in Yang’s 1983 Toyota Célica, the car insured by Yang’s State Farm automobile insurance policy. Yang was the named insured on this policy. The policy had “Uninsured Motor Vehicle” liability…

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.