All Fresh Produce v. Hartford Fire Ins.
Filed 6/13/06 All Fresh Produce v. Hartford Fire Ins. CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| ALL FRESH PRODUCE, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. | B184620 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC321170) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, James R. Dunn, Judge. Affirmed.
Steven W. Murray for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Countryman & McDaniel, Michael S. McDaniel and Andrew D. Kehagiaras for Defendant and Respondent.
_________________________________
All Fresh Produce, Inc. appeals from judgment on the pleadings in favor of its insurer, Hartford Fire Insurance Company in this action brought for damage to property stored in its warehouse. We conclude that Hartford did not have a duty to defend All Fresh under the policy because the plain language excludes coverage for damage caused by mechanical failure and spoilage.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
The ruling of a trial court granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings is subject to de novo review because it â€
