California Court of Appeal

In an equitable contribution action between two insurers, trial court's judgment is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supports the trial court's findings regarding the project completion date; 2) the court did not err in ruling that the contractors warranty endorsements in defendant's policies were enforceable preconditions for coverage; and 3) coverage was not available under defendant's umbrella policy. Furthermore, substantial evidence supports the trial court's allocation of relative responsibility to the carriers, and the court properly exercised its discretion in setting the amounts of equitable contribution

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/02/2009
• Published 09/02/2009

Judges

• FLIER, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Grimm, Vranjes, McCormick & Graham, A. Carl Yaeckel and Charles A. Phillips, San Diego, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Selman Breitman, Sheryl W. Leichenger, Eldon S. Edson and Tam T. Glunt, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent.