American Motorists Insurance v. Superior Court

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 1048·68 Cal. App. 4th 864·80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 621·98 Daily Journal DAR 12864·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9224
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 18, 1998No. B124087California3,641 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vogelmiriam, J.

An insured sued its insurer for declaratory relief, damages and other remedies, contending the carrier had a duty to defend and indemnify the insured in three third party actions. In 1993, we affirmed orders adjudicating the duty-to-defend issue in the insured’s favor and directing the carrier to pay for the insured’s defense in the underlying actions. The carrier now claims the insured’s defense costs were “unreasonable” and that it is entitled to have a jury determine the amount that ought to be reimbursed by the insured. The trial court denied the carrier’s request for a jury trial, and at the same time ruled that it would be the carrier’s burden to prove the fees and costs were unreasonable (as opposed to the insured’s burden to prove they were reasonable and necessarily incurred). We agree with the trial court.

Background

From 1948 to 1982, Montrose Chemical Corporation of California manufactured DDT. During the early 1980’s, Montrose was named as a defendant *868 in several private and governmental environmental contamination actions (referred to by the parties and by us as Newman, Stringfellow and Parr-Richmond). 1 Montrose tendered the defense of all three…

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.