Insurance
Aug. 14, 2015
Courts continue to quibble over what is an 'accident'
Two recent decisions embrace the "pro-insurer" trend in connection with "what is an accident."
Rex Heeseman
JAMS
555 W 5th St Fl 32
Los Angeles , CA 90013-1055
Phone: (213) 253-9772
Fax: (213) 620-0100
Email: rheeseman@jamsdar.com
Stanford Univ Law School
Rex Heeseman retired from the Los Angeles Count Superior Court bench in 2014. He is at JAMS, Los Angeles. Besides speaking at various MCLE programs, he co-authors The Rutter Group's practice guide on "Insurance Litigation." From 2002 to 2015, he was an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School.
For a while, in some areas not much happens at the appellate level, then an "explosion" of activity. One example is the law on punitive damages, where significant activity commenced in 2003 and continued for several years.
Another example is the meaning of an "accident" for insurance policy purposes. See State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Sup. Ct. (Wright), 164 Cal. App. 4th 317 (2008) (aka "the swimming pool case"); Delgado v. Inter....For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In