Supreme Court of California

In a single action brought by an insured against both its primary and excess insurers, the interests of the two types of insurers are not necessarily "substantially adverse," and the two insurers may only exercise one challenge, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6, to the assigned trial judge.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/13/2005
• Published 01/13/2005

Judges

• GEORGE, C.J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Charlston, Revich, Chamberlin & Williams, Charlston, Revich & Chamberlin, Stephen P. Soskin and Timothy F. Rivers, Los Angeles, for Petitioner., Latham & Watkins, David L. Mulliken, San Diego, Charles S. Treat, San Francisco, Diana Strauss Casey and Marc D. Halpern, San Diego, for Real Party in Interest., Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe, David B. Goodwin;  Munger, Tolles & Olson, Cary B. Lerman, Paul J. Watford, Los Angeles, and Anne M. Voigts, San Francisco, for Kelly-Moore Paint Company, Inc. and Bayer CropScience Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.


• For Appellees:
  
• No appearance for Respondent.