Issue By: David L. Blinn Trent Mills v. AAA Northern California, Nevada & Utah Ins. Exchange Court of Appeal, Third District (September 20, 2016) Under Insurance Code § 1861.03(c)(1), an insurer has a statutory right to cancel an automobile liability policy prior to its expiration if it is faced with “a substantial increase in the…

Issue By: Tom LoSavio Mediation Privilege – Federal v. State Law Applicability In Re: TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation; Sony Electronics, Inc. et al. v. Hannstar Display Corp. U.S. Court of Appeal, Ninth Circuit (September 1, 2016) California law (Evidence Code §§ 1115-1128) recognizes a privilege for communications in and around a mediation. Federal law…

Issue By: James F. Regan Aluma Systems Concrete Construction of California v. Nibbi Bros. Inc., et al. Court of Appeal, First Appellate District (August 16, 2016) This case considered the applicability of a contract’s indemnification clause where there was no alleged negligence by the indemnifying party in an underlying action. Aluma Systems Concrete Construction of…

Issue By: David L. Blinn Barickman v. Mercury Casualty Company, et al. Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (July 25, 2016) Where a carrier refuses to accept a settlement demand within policy limits, it risks the chance of being held responsible for any judgment or verdict in excess of the policy limits. This case considered…

Edited by: Charles Redfield Rebecca Osborne v. Bruce Yasmeh, et al. Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (July 28, 2016) In California, two overlapping laws, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code § 51) and the Disabled Persons Act (Civil Code §§ 54-55.3), are the principal sources of state disability access protection. In Surrey v….

© 2017 LOW, BALL & LYNCH | DISCLAIMER | PRIVACY

CONNECT WITH US: