CLARENDON AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY v.
NORTH AMERICAN CAPACITY INSURANCE COMPANY
Filed 6/15/10;
pub. order 7/7/10
(see end of opn.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
CLARENDON AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff
and Appellant,
v.
NORTH AMERICAN CAPACITY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant
and Respondent.
E048176
(Super.Ct.No.
CIVRS701868)
O P I N I
O N
APPEAL from the Superior
Court of San
Bernardino County. A.
Rex Victor, Judge. (Retired judge of the
San Bernardino Super. Ct.
assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal.
Const.) Reversed.
Law Offices of Karen-Denise Lee, Karen-Denise
Lee; Blau & Associates and David S. Blau for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Grimm, Vranjes, McCormick &
Graham, A. Carl Yaeckel, Charles A. Phillips and Mark Vranjes for Defendant and
Respondent.
I. INTRODUCTION
Eagle Ranch Residential, LLC, doing
business as Tanamera Homes and Resort Communities, LLC (Tanamera), constructed
a residential development in Victorville known as Shenandoah at Eagle Ranch
(Eagle Ranch). Clarendon America
Insurance Company (Clarendon) and North American Capacity Insurance Company
(NAC), the parties to the present action, insured Tanamera under separate and
consecutive general commercial liability policies.
In the present action, Clarendon sued NAC for declaratory relief, equitable contribution,
and partial equitable indemnity, seeking a proportionate or equitable share
of sums Clarendon expended to defend Tanamera in a construction defect action
brought by the owners of 43 Eagle Ranch homes (the Bradley action).[1] NAC moved for summary judgment on the ground
its duty to defend Tanamera in the Bradley action never arose because Tanamera
never paid a $25,000 â€
| Description | Eagle Ranch Residential, LLC, doing business as Tanamera Homes and Resort Communities, LLC (Tanamera), constructed a residential development in Victorville known as Shenandoah at Eagle Ranch (Eagle Ranch). Clarendon America Insurance Company (Clarendon) and North American Capacity Insurance Company (NAC), the parties to the present action, insured Tanamera under separate and consecutive general commercial liability policies. In the present action, Clarendon sued NAC for declaratory relief, equitable contribution, and partial equitable indemnity, seeking a proportionate or equitable share of sums Clarendon expended to defend Tanamera in a construction defect action brought by the owners of 43 Eagle Ranch homes (the Bradley action).[1] NAC moved for summary judgment on the ground its duty to defend Tanamera in the Bradley action never arose because Tanamera never paid a $25,000 †|
| Rating |
