Kapsimallis

Kapsimallis v. Allstate Insurance

Good Law
104 Cal. App. 4th 667·128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 358·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 5187·2002 Daily Journal DAR 14361·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 12231
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 19, 2002No. B156359California3,195 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Perluss, J.

*670 Opinion

George and Priscilla Kapsimallis, Ted Kingsley, Charles Fontaine and Anne Splaver, individually and as proposed class representatives, filed a lawsuit against Allstate Insurance Company, alleging Allstate had intentionally denied valid claims for benefits after the Northridge earthquake by improperly using January 17, 1994, as the date of loss for all claimants to establish whether a suit had been commenced within one year after a loss, as required by Allstate’s policies, rather than determining the date of loss individually based on when the claimant reasonably should have discovered appreciable damage caused by the earthquake.

The trial court, assuming Allstate had in fact used January 17, 1994, as the date of loss for all claimants, found the practice proper as a matter of law and granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings, holding plaintiffs could not allege a breach of contract, bad faith or a Business and Professions Code section 17200 violation. Because we conclude the analysis in Prudential-LMI Com. Insurance v. Superior Court (1990) 51 Cal.3d 674 [ 274 Cal.Rptr. 387 , 798 P.2d 1230 ] (Prudential-LMI) is fully applicable to cases involving cataclysmic…

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.