747 Fed.Appx. 516 (9th Cir. 2018), 17-15404, Globe Imports v. Nationwide Insurance

Docket Nº:17-15404
Citation:747 Fed.Appx. 516
Party Name:GLOBE IMPORTS et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Robert Maxon, Plaintiff, v. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE, Defendant-Appellee,
Attorney:Bradford C. Floyd, Attorney, Floyd Law Firm, Eureka, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants Michael W. Melendez, Cozen O’Connor, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee
Judge Panel:Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO, District Judge.
Case Date:August 29, 2018
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 516

747 Fed.Appx. 516 (9th Cir. 2018)

GLOBE IMPORTS et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Robert Maxon, Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONWIDE INSURANCE, Defendant-Appellee,

No. 17-15404

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

August 29, 2018

Submitted August 13, 2018 San Francisco, California

Editorial Note:

Governing the citation to unpublished opinions please refer to federal rules of appellate procedure rule 32.1. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.

Page 517

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding, D.C. No. 4:14-cv-03676-CW

Bradford C. Floyd, Attorney, Floyd Law Firm, Eureka, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants

Michael W. Melendez, Cozen O’Connor, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO,[*] District Judge.

MEMORANDUM[**]

On December 8, 2006, a fire in Eureka, California damaged two buildings - Building 1 and Building 3 - and completely destroyed a third building, Building 2. Each of the buildings was commercial property owned by Plaintiffs (together, Globe). At the time of the fire, Globe was insured under a commercial property insurance policy issued by Defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide). Nationwide paid $1,552,021 pursuant to the insurance contract to indemnify the losses. However, Globe alleged Nationwide substantially underpaid for the damage and, in the case of Building 2, destruction, of the buildings. Globe sued in California Superior Court, and Nationwide removed to the Northern District of California (Wilken, J.).[1] Globe described dozens of specific items for which it alleged Nationwide should have reimbursed it. Following a bench trial, the district court ruled regarding each of the items placed in dispute. Globe appeals the district court’s ruling with respect to two items, both of which were destroyed with Building 2.

1. First, Globe argues the district court erred when it ruled Nationwide was required by the parties contract to reimburse Globe for only 934 square feet of a 3,516 square foot dance floor because only 934 square...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP