Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance v. Thompson & Co. Insurance Services, Inc.

MEMORANDUM **

Thompson & Company Insurance Services, Inc. (“Thompson”), an insurance brokerage firm, appeals the district court’s summary judgment for the Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company (“Philadelphia”) in its action seeking a declaration of rights under an Insurance Agents and Brokers Professional Liability Policy (“the Policy”) which Philadelphia had issued to Thompson. We affirm.

Philadelphia has eliminated any and all possibility of coverage under the terms of the policy because both underlying actions are “claims for fees,” which are expressly *771 excluded from coverage. See Tana v. Professionals Prototype I Ins. Co., 47 Cal. App.4th 1612 , 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 160, 163 (Ct. App.1996).

Thompson’s claimed “reasonable expectation” of coverage is not relevant because the language of the policy is clear and unambiguous. American Star Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of the West, 232 Cal.App.3d 1320 , 284 Cal.Rptr. 45, 52 (Ct.App.1991).

The fact that the underlying actions contain claims for negligent misrepresentation does not give rise to a duty to defend both because California law considers negligent misrepresentation to be purposeful rather than accidental for the purpose of…