§Why CasetextPricing

Opposition_msj_rescission

Opposition

17 Cited authorities

  1. Waller v. Truck Ins. Exchange, Inc.

    11 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 1,805 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, when extrinsic facts eliminate the potential for coverage, an insurer may decline to defend even if the complaint had suggested potential liability

  2. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court

    6 Cal.4th 287 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 995 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an insurer may seek "summary adjudication that no potential for liability exists and thus that it has no duty to defend" based on extrinsic evidence

  3. Miller v. Department of Corrections

    36 Cal.4th 446 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 581 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiffs could maintain a hostile work environment claim on the ground that widespread favoritism created an atmosphere demeaning to women, where a prison warden was engaged in sexual relationships with three female employees with whom he frequently engaged in public displays of sexual conduct; and who, because of their relationship with the warden, were granted employment benefits not available to others; permitted to harass the employees without repercussions; and provided advancement opportunities based upon sexual favors rather than merit

  4. Teselle v. McLoughlin

    173 Cal.App.4th 156 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 343 times
    Stating that a right to an accounting can exist solely from possession by the defendant of money which, because of the parties' relationship, the defendant is obliged to surrender

  5. Morey v. Vannucci

    64 Cal.App.4th 904 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 286 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the jury had to determine which conflicting evidence to believe before the court could interpret a disputed contract provision

  6. Pipitone v. Williams

    244 Cal.App.4th 1437 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 103 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding an appellate court should review de novo a trial court's evidentiary rulings on a summary judgment motion

  7. Roman v. BRE Properties, Inc.

    237 Cal.App.4th 1040 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 82 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Noting at summary judgment, "conversational use of the term 'disability' is not proof that [plaintiff's] condition, whatever it may be, equates to a disability within the meaning of the statutory definitions."

  8. Mitchell v. United National Ins. Co.

    127 Cal.App.4th 457 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 106 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a concealed fact is "material" if the non-disclosed information would have an impact on the risk that the insurance company assumes and the terms under which it would issue an insurance policy

  9. Hervey v. Mercury Casualty Co.

    185 Cal.App.4th 954 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 78 times
    Finding that a medical expense endorsement that deleted a provision dealing with reimbursements of medical payments did not alter a different provision in the policy dealing with reimbursements in connection with uninsured motorist coverage

  10. Imperial Casualty Indemnity Co. v. Sogomonian

    198 Cal.App.3d 169 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 126 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that assumption of defense cannot be basis for claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing where contract had been rescinded