Charles White, an Individual, Doing Business as Precision Painting v. Allstate Insurance Co.

99 F.3d 1148 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Charles WHITE, an individual, doing business as Precision Painting, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-55824. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 9, 1996. Decided Oct. 18, 1996. 1 Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and COYLE 1 , District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM * OVERVIEW 3 Charles White, dba Precision Painting, ("White") appeals from the district court's summary judgment in favor of Allstate Insurance Company ("Allstate"). White's diversity action alleges malicious prosecution, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, abuse of process, and breach of contract. The allegations arise out of the filing of a lawsuit against White by White's insurer, Allstate, to recover on a subrogation claim relating to a fire that destroyed a house White was painting. Allstate paid the owners of the house and alleged that the fire…