Dua

Dua v. Stillwater Insurance Company

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2023B314780California5,265 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Facts

The following facts are undisputed. A. Insurance Policy Dua was the named insured on a homeowner’s insurance policy issued by Stillwater that provided her with personal liability coverage. The policy provided coverage if a “claim is made or a suit is brought against an ‘insured’ for damages because of ‘bodily injury’ or ‘property damages’ caused by an ‘occurrence’ to which this coverage applies.” The personal liability provision stated that Stillwater would pay up to its limit of liability for damages for which the insured is legally liable, and will “[p]rovide a defense at our expense . . . even if the suit is groundless, false or fraudulent.” The policy made three references to an “animal liability exclusion.” First, the policy contained a separate page entitled “Animal Liability Exclusion” (Exclusion 1),1 which states: “This insurance does not apply to any occurrence or damages caused by any animal, at any time, at any premises insured hereunder, or caused by, arising out of, or in any way related to any animal owned by or in the care, custody, or control of the insured, or any member of the insured’s family or household. [¶] Animal liability coverage is…

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.