California Court of Appeal

Summary judgment in favor of defendant insurer in plaintiff's action concerning adjustment of its property damage losses from the 1994 Northridge earthquake is affirmed over claims that: 1) defnedant's failure to investigate plaintiff's newly discovered earthquake damage constitutes a breach of the insurance contract and bad faith; 2) evidence of newly discovered earthquake damage -- estimated at more than seven times the cost-of-repair estimate prepared by defendant in 1994 -- creates a triable issue of material fact regarding whether in 1994 defendant failed to adequately investigate and evaluate its earthquake damage claim; and 3) the methodology used by defendant in 1994 to calculate the amount of its loss was impermissible.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/20/2006
• Published 10/19/2006

Judges

• PERLUSS, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Loewenthal, Hillshafer & Rosen and Glenn T. Rosen, Sherman Oaks, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• LHB PacificLaw Partners, Clarke B. Holland and Lisa L. Kirk, Emeryville;  Crandall, Wade & Lowe and Michael J. McGuire, Irvine;  Robie & Matthai and James R. Robie, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent.