California Court of Appeal

Plaintiff's action was properly dismissed. He violated the requirement of the insurance policy that he submit to an examination under oath; the insurer could on that basis deny his claim without a showing of prejudice; the availability of a deposition in litigation does not excuse his breach of the examination-under-oath requirement; he had no valid bad faith claim.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/03/2004
• Published 03/03/2004

Judges

• MOSK, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  Law Offices of Jeff A. Lesser, Jeff A. Lesser;  Esner & Chang, Stuart B. Esner, Los Angeles, Andrew N. Chang, Walnut Creek, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Horvitz & Levy, David S. Ettinger, Encino, Nina E. Scholtz;  Cannon & Nelms, Anthony L. Cannon, Tustin, Derrick R. Sturm, for Defendant and Respondent.