Black Silver Enterprises v. Sequoia Ins. CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2013D059682California1,367 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mcintyre, J.

DISCUSSION

A. Policy Provisions Concerning Employee Dishonesty

The parties agree that the general provisions of the Sequoia policies

excluded coverage for employee dishonesty. However, they disagree as to the

effect of the coverage extender. Black Silver contends the coverage extender

provided coverage in addition to the business personal property limits in the

policies, whereas Sequoia maintains it limited coverage to $10,000. In regard to

employee dishonesty, the coverage extender provided the following:

"As respects coverage under this endorsement, the following is added to the Businessowners Coverage Form Section I.A. Coverage, Subsection 5. Additional Coverages:

"Coverage for Employee Dishonesty is provided as described in Section I.G. Optional Coverages, Subsection 3. Employee Dishonesty of form BP 0003. The most we will pay under this coverage is the limit of insurance shown for Employee Dishonesty on Page 1 of this endorsement. The requirements of ERISA are provided by this coverage. The limit provided under this endorsement is an additional limit to limits provided under similar coverage if provided elsewhere in this policy. The deductible applicable to business…

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.