Crisco

Crisco v. Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 4, 20203:19-cv-07320California3,626 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

17 In an insurance coverage dispute arising out of the Tubbs Fire in 2017, this order rules 18 against the insurance company and in favor of the fire victims.

STATEMENT

20 The parties stipulate to the following facts (Dkt. No. 43). Until the fire, our ten plaintiffs 21 owned and resided in ten mobile homes at Journey’s End Mobile Home Park in Santa Rosa. 22 Defendants Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan and Foremost Property and 23 Casualty Insurance Company (collectively, Foremost) insured plaintiffs’ dwellings. The 24 relevant terms are the same under each of the ten policies. 25 1. THE POLICIES. 26 The policies protected three types of property: (A) the dwelling, (B) other structures, and 27 (C) personal property. Only coverage A is at issue: Coverage A — Dwelling 1 We insure: 2 1. Your dwelling that is described on the Declaration Page. 3 2. Materials and supplies for use in the construction, alteration or repair of your dwelling located within or immediately adjacent to your dwelling. 5 3. Any structure you own that is attached to your dwelling, other than a structure attached only by a fence,…

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.