California Court of Appeal

In an insurance matter in which plaintiff and defendant insurance companies insured mobile home park and in which plaintiff defended mobile home park against residents' "failure to maintain" claims resulting in a settlement, judgment against defendant for contribution is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) no costs were taxed against mobile home park by a court, so defendant did not have to contribute toward the $1.8 million payment; 2) the plaintiffs in the original action were not entitled to attorney fees pursuant to section 798.85 so defendant could not be liable for any statutory attorney fees under its supplementary payments coverage; 3) even if defendant had to contribute to the $1.8 million payment, it should have been pro rated at less than $400,000 because only 109 of the 188 plaintiffs in the original action were conceivably injured during the relevant policy periods; 4) defendant should not have had to contribute toward the $83,216.76 amount paid for independent counsel for mobile home park because the cost was not a shared burden; and 5) defendant should not have had to contribute toward duplicative defense fees and costs.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/17/2008
• Published 12/17/2008

Judges

• ASHMANN-GERST, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Summers & Shives, Robert V. Closson, Ian G. Williamson, San Diego;  Clifford Hirsch and Robert V. Closson, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Soltman, Levitt & Flaherty, John S. Levitt, Philip J. Bonoli, Robert Lane Morris, Thousand Oaks;  Soltman, Levitt, Flaherty & Wattles, John S. Levitt, Philip J. Bonoli and Robert Lane Morris, Westlake Village, for Defendant and Appellant.