KF Dairies, Inc. & Affiliates v. Fireman's Fund Insurance

We find that questions of state law may be determinative of the above-captioned claim. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 29.5 of the California Rules of Court, we certify the following question to the California Supreme Court:

Although two California Court of Appeal decisions, FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & Cos., 61 Cal.App.4th 1132 , 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 (1998), and A.C. Label Co. v. Transamerica Ins. Co., 48 Cal.App.4th 1188 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 207 (1996), have answered this *1227 question in the negative, we note that these decisions are in potential conflict with the rule established by the California Supreme Court that the language of the policy, unless ambiguous, governs the scope of coverage. See Bay Cities Paving and Grading, Inc. v. Lawyers’ Mutual Ins. Co., 5 Cal.4th 854, 867 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 691 , 855 P.2d 1263 (1993); Bank of the West v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.4th 1254, 1264 , 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 538 , 833 P.2d 545 (1992); AIU Ins. Co. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County, 51 Cal.3d 807, 821-22 , 274 Cal.Rptr. 820 , 799 P.2d 1253 (1990). We therefore respectfully request that the California Supreme Court exercise its discretionary authority to answer this question or to provide whatever…