Truck Insurance Exchange v. Unigard Insurance

Good Law
89 F. App'x 43
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 18, 2004No. 03-15079, 03-15119; D.C. No. CV-02-01882-LKKCalifornia310 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Truck Insurance Exchange (“Truck”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Unigard Insurance Company (“Unigard”). Truck claims that both it and Unigard had a duty to defend joint insureds in an action by a *44 third party (“Schrimsher”) against the insureds. Truck, having solely defended the insureds in the Schrimsher action, claims a right of equitable contribution from Unigard.

Under California law, an insurer has “a duty to defend its insured whenever it ascertains facts which give rise to the potential of liability under the policy.” Gray v. Zurich Ins. Co., 65 Cal.2d 263 , 54 Cal. Rptr. 104 , 419 P.2d 168, 177 (1966). The insurer must look for potential coverage in the complaint itself and also in extrinsic facts known to the insurer at the time defense is tendered. See Horace Mann Ins. Co. v. Barbara B., 4 Cal.4th 1076 , 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 210, 213 , 846 P.2d 792 (1993).

Under its policy, Unigard was obligated to provide a defense to the insureds “[i]f a claim is made or a suit is brought against an ‘insured’ for damages ... from ‘personal injury.’ ” Personal injury includes slander or defamation and invasion of privacy. Even though…

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.