Sequoia Ins. Co. v. H.C. Makabe & Son CA2/7

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2013B235532California4,137 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jackson, J.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and cross-complainant H.C. Makabe & Son, LLC (Makabe) appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and cross-defendant Sequoia Insurance Company (Sequoia). We affirm.

FACTS

Makabe owns a shopping center at 18663 Ventura Boulevard in Tarzana. The center is managed by Bob Wall (Wall). In June 2007, Makabe leased space in the center to Steadfast in Commitment, Inc. dba Re/Max Grand Central (Steadfast). Makabe‟s operation of the shopping center was insured by Sequoia under a businessowners insurance policy, effective November 2007 through November 2008. On October 30, 2008, Steadfast filed a complaint against Makabe and Wall, seeking declaratory relief and damages for constructive eviction, breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment and possession, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and breach of written contract. The gravamen of the complaint was that Wall engaged in a course of conduct which interfered with Steadfast‟s use and enjoyment of the property, caused distress to Steadfast‟s personnel, and was serious enough to rise to the level of constructive eviction. Makabe forwarded the summons and complaint to its insurance agent,…

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.