Golestanian

Mercury Insurance Co. v. Golestanian

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 11, 2022JAD22-04California3,026 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Artin Golestanian was driving when he inadvertently crashed into four vehicles that were parked on a public street. Plaintiff Mercury Insurance Company provided collision coverage to one of the vehicles that was struck by defendant. After defendant’s insurer became insolvent, plaintiff pursued a subrogation claim against defendant to recover the damages paid to its insured. Following a bench trial on stipulated facts, the trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff, finding it was authorized to pursue the claim pursuant to Insurance Code section 1063.1, subdivision (c)(5).1 On appeal, defendant contends plaintiff’s claim was barred by section 1063.2, subdivision (c)(2). We agree with defendant and accordingly reverse the judgment.

BACKGROUND

A complaint filed by plaintiff alleged an action in subrogation against defendant. The cause was adjudicated by bench trial on stipulated facts in conjunction with trial briefs filed by the parties. The relevant stipulated facts follow. In the morning of July 17, 2016, defendant was driving a 2000 Mercedes when, due to his negligent driving, he lost control of the vehicle and collided into two unoccupied…

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.