James River Ins. Co. v. Medolac Labs.

Good Law
290 F. Supp. 3d 956
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 22, 2018Case No. CV 16–7443–MWF(ASx)California8,482 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Before the Court is Plaintiff James River Insurance Company's ("James River") Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (the "Motion"), filed on January 6, 2018. (Docket No. 52). On January 22, 2018, Defendants Medolac Laboratories a Public Benefit Corporation fka Neolac, Inc. dba Medolac ("Medolac"), Elena Taggart Medo ("Medo"), and Adrienne Weir ("Weir") (collectively, the "Medo Defendants") filed an Opposition. (Docket No. 62). On January 29, 2018, James River filed a Reply. (Docket No. 69). The Court has considered the papers filed on the Motion, and held a hearing on February 12, 2018 .

For the reasons discussed below, the Motion is GRANTED . The claims in the underlying Prolacta Action all arise out of the same conduct alleged to constitute a breach of contract, and therefore they are excluded from coverage under the Policy by the Breach of Contract Exclusion. The claims also all arise out of conduct excluded by the Business Conduct Exclusion. James River is entitled to reimbursement of defense costs and fees incurred from October 25, 2016, onward.

I. BACKGROUND

James River commenced this action arising out of an insurance coverage dispute on October 4, 2016. (Complaint (Docket…

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.