Pizano

Northfield Ins. Co. v. Pizano

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 20222:19-cv-01198California4,656 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NORTHFIELD INSURANCE

COMPANY,

No. 2:19-cv-01198-TLN-JDP Plaintiff,

ORDER v. 15 URIEL GUERRERO PIZANO and SHAWN THRASH, Defendants,

18 19 20 21 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Northfield Insurance Company’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 9.) Defendant Uriel Guerrero Pizano (“Defendant”) filed an opposition. (ECF No. 17.) Plaintiff replied. (ECF No. 18.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. /// 27 Defendant Shawn Thrash (“Thrash”) has not appeared in this action and does not oppose the instant motion. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This case arises out of a dispute between the parties over whether Plaintiff has a duty to defend and indemnify Defendant in an underlying action in Solano County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 15, 26–28, 32–34; ECF No. 17 at 7.) On March 13, 2019, Diane…

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.