Hachigian

Hachigian v. CNA Insurance Companies

Good Law
3 F. App'x 630
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 8, 2001No. 99-55339; D.C. No. CV-98-07841-RCalifornia297 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Michael M. Hachigian appeals a summary judgment in favor of Transcontinental Insurance Co. (“Transcontinental”) in a diversity action alleging the breach of an insurance contract and a breach of the *631 duty of good faith and fair dealing. We affirm the grant of summary judgment.

Hachigian’s malpractice insurance policy covered “claims made against [Hachigian] and reported to [Transcontinental] during [the] policy term.” The policy defined “claim” as “the receipt of a demand for money or services, naming [insured] and alleging a wrongful act.” Because California’s notice-prejudice rule does not apply to “claims made” policies, the terms of Transcontinental’s contract with Hachigian should be strictly enforced. See Burns v. International Ins. Co., 929 F.2d 1422, 1425 (9th Cir.1991) (holding that notice-prejudice rule does not apply to claims-made policies). Accord Helfand v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 10 Cal. App.4th 869, 888 , 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 295, 305 (1992); Slater v. Lawyers’ Mutual Ins. Co., 227 Cal.App.3d 1415, 1421-24 , 278 Cal. Rptr. 479, 482-83 (1991); Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 221 Cal. App.3d 1348, 1356-57 , 270 Cal.Rptr. 779, 783…

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.