Brown

*144 MEMORANDUM ***

Dorothy Anne Brown appeals the district court’s Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of her lawsuit against Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company, her homeowners’ insurance carrier, for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The district court found that Hartford had no duty to defend or indemnify Brown in a bankruptcy adversary proceeding seeking the return of estate property allegedly illegally transferred to her, because the action was not a covered suit for damages under the terms of Brown’s policy. We agree.

On appeal, Brown insists she should have been defended for a covered “occurrence.” Her homeowners’ insurance policy provides personal liability coverage “[i]f a claim is made or a suit is brought against an insured for damages because of bodily injury or property damage caused by an occurrence to which this coverage applies.” 1 Like the district court, we find that Brown failed to meet her “burden of showing that there has been an ‘occurrence’ within the terms of the policy” and otherwise “to bring the claim within the basic scope of coverage.” Waller v. Truck Ins. Exch., Inc., 11 Cal.4th 1 , 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 370 , 900 P.2d 619, 625-26…

dissenting.

I dissent. California’s duty to defend coverage is far broader than my colleagues in the majority appear to recognize. All that is necessary is that the facts could support a claim; a specific covered remedy need not be pled. See Montrose Chemical Co. v. Super. Ct., 6 Cal.4th 287, 296 , 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 , 861 P.2d 1153 (1993). Moreover, Brown’s receipt of the property from her brother is not asserted to be intentional and, under California law, may constitute an occurrence. See St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Super. Ct., 161 Cal.App.3d 1199, 1202-03 , 208 Cal.Rptr. 5 (1984).