California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius, Inc.
Decision Date | 12 December 1980 |
Citation | 113 Cal.App.3d 243,169 Cal.Rptr. 685 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | CALIFORNIA UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Club ACQUARIUS et al., Defendants and Appellants. * Civ. 57856. |
Brown & Martin, and Carl R. Brown, San Diego, for defendants and appellants.
Wise & Nelson, Anthony F. Wiezorek and Michael J. Pearce, Long Beach, for plaintiff and respondent.
Defendants appeal from a judgment in favor of an insurer in an action for declaratory relief. We affirm the judgment.
Defendants procured from plaintiff insurance company a policy which, by endorsement, insured them against liability in connection with two named publications-"Acquarius" and "Diving Dealer and Professional Instructor." In 1974, defendants were sued in federal court for copyright infringement and unfair competition. The complaint in that action named as offending publications only a book referred to as the "Red Book." Defendants, having retained counsel 1 tendered defense of that action to plaintiff. Plaintiff responded by a letter reading as follows:
Defendants' privately retained counsel agreed to the terms of that letter and the trial of the action therein referred to proceeded. The private counsel reported to counsel designated by plaintiff and their fees were paid by plaintiff. The trial was bifurcated and the liability issues were first tried. That portion of the trial resulted in findings of fact imposing liability on defendants for the publication of the "Red Book" (and, as incident thereto, the repetition of offending parts of that book in another book known as the "Black Book"). No finding was made that either of the two publications expressly mentioned in the insurance policy had infringed the rights of the plaintiff in that action. Plaintiff thereupon proposed to withdraw from supporting the defense in the damage portion of the case and filed the present action for declaratory relief, praying for a declaration that its obligation to defend had come to an end.
We think it clear that, except as the letter above quoted may have imposed on plaintiff an obligation broader than its policy created, plaintiff had a right to withdraw from the defense once the federal court, by its findings, had made it clear that the case, in fact, did not involve the limited risk set forth in that policy. (Firco, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (1959) 173 Cal.App.2d 524, 628, 343 P.2d 311.) That is a reasonable rule since, under the holding of Firco and of Gray v. Zurich Ins. Co. (1966) 65 Cal.2d 263, 54 Cal.Rptr. 104, 419 P.2d 168, there exists a duty on the insurer to defend an action if potential liability to pay exists, even though that potential liability to pay is remote.
The chief contention of defendants here is that, by the letter above quoted, plaintiff had assumed an obligation to defend broader than the policy required. That claim is based on the use, in the letter above quoted, of the provision: "We will assume the cost of the defense for the entire action." As did the trial court, we reject that contention. An insurer, bound to defend an action against its insured, must...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
CNA Casualty of California v. Seaboard Surety Co.
...therefore ultimately immaterial to the question of appellants' defense obligation.6 The case of California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius, Inc. (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 243, 247, 169 Cal.Rptr. 685, on which Pacific relies heavily, is not applicable. That was an action by an insurer for declar......
-
IMCERA Group, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.
... ... B079031 ... Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California ... March 1, 1996 ... Certified for Partial Publication * ... As ... As to the four primary insurers, National Union Fire Insurance Company ("National Union") settled before trial, leaving ... (See California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 243, 247-248, 169 Cal.Rptr.2d 685 [in ... ...
-
Montrose Chemical Corp. of California v. American Motorists Ins. Co.
...83; Royal Globe Ins. Co. v. Whitaker (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 532, 536-538, 226 Cal.Rptr. 435; California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius, Inc. (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 243, 247, 169 Cal.Rptr. 685; State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Flynt, supra, 17 Cal.App.3d at p. 543, 95 Cal.Rptr. 296.) However......
-
Buss v. Superior Court
...Mann Ins. Co. v. Barbara B., supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 1081, 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 210, 846 P.2d 792; California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 243, 247-248, 169 Cal.Rptr. 685.) But it is not explained in that decision or in any of its progeny. We cannot justify the insurer's d......
-
Insurance
...see also Hogan v. Midland Ins. Co. (1970) 3 Cal. 3d 553, 564, 91 Cal. Rptr. 153, 159; Cal. Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius (1980) 113 Cal. App. 3d 243, 248, 169 Cal. Rptr. 685, 687. An insurer’s duty to indemnify and its duty to defend “lie at the core of the standard policy.” Certain Under......
-
CHAPTER 8
...in Hogan. (See Horace Mann Ins. Co. v. Barbara B., (supra), 4 Cal. 4th at p. 1081; California Union Ins. Co. v. Club Aquarius (1980) 113 Cal. App. 3d 243, 247-248, 169 Cal. Rptr. 685.) But it is not explained in that decision or in any of its progeny. We cannot justify the insurer’s duty to......