Lapekas
Lapekas v. United Services Automobile Ass'n (In re Lapekas)
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Susan Cannon Lapekas appeals from the district court’s affirmance of the bankrupt *618 cy court’s judgment in favor of Lapekas’ insurer, United Services Automobile Association (“USAA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d)(1). We affirm.
I
Lapekas argues that USAA (a) forfeited its contractual right to arbitration, (b) impliedly waived that right, or (c) is equitably estopped from asserting that right. We address each of these arguments in turn.
A
Under California law, an insurer has a duty to inform its insured of any applicable time limits affecting the insured’s UIM claim. See Cal. Ins.Code § 11580.2(k) (insurer required to “notify its insured in writing of the statute of limitation applicable to the injury”).
USAA was excused from its duty to inform Lapekas of the relevant time limits because she was represented by counsel. See id.; Juarez v. 21st Century Ins. Co., 105 Cal.App.4th 371 , 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 418, 421 (Ct.App.2003) (section 11580.2(k) “cannot be applied in matters involving uninsured motorist coverage when the insured is represented by counsel”). Although USAA did not respond in writing to Lapekas’ conditional arbitration demand, there…