Cal. Capital Ins. Co. v. Truck Ins. Exchange CA2/4
Plaintiff and appellant California Capital Insurance Company (CCI) brought an action for equitable contribution against defendant and respondent Truck Insurance Exchange (Truck), alleging that Truck failed to participate in the defense of its insured in underlying litigation. Truck moved for summary judgment, contending that its insurance policy provided excess rather than primary coverage and therefore no contribution was required. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment in Truck’s favor.
On appeal, CCI argues that the excess-only provision in Truck’s policy operated as an escape clause, allowing Truck to avoid paying for the coverage it promised, and therefore the trial court should have refused to enforce it. CCI also contends that Truck had a duty to defend its insured because of the potential that some of the allegations in the underlying litigation would trigger liability that was covered under Truck’s policy but not CCI’s. We agree with the trial court that s
Comments on Cal. Capital Ins. Co. v. Truck Ins. Exchange CA2/4