Strabala

Strabala v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance

Good Law
124 F. App'x 517
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 18, 2005No. 03-16508; D.C. No. CV-03-00462-RLHCalifornia429 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Cheryl and Gary Strabala appeal the district court’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) dismissal of their diversity action, which alleged breach of contract, unfair claims practices, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing against State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance, their home insurer. Because the Strabalas are contractually time-barred from bringing suit under Nevada law and because Nevada law does not recognize an independent claim of breach of fiduciary duty by an insured against its insurer, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of their case.

The district court did not clearly err in finding that State Farm’s letter of February 21, 2002 constituted a formal denial of Appellants’ “entire claim,” particularly when viewed in light of Mrs. Strabala’s own letters to State Farm. See Chevron USA, Inc. v. Bronster, 363 F.3d 846, 855 (9th Cir.2004) (reviewing the district court’s factual findings for clear error).

The district court did not err when, citing Clark v. Truck Insurance Exchange, 95 Nev. 544 , 598 P.2d 628 (1979), it found that the twelve-month contractual limitation began to run as of the February 21, 2002 letter…

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.