Facts

On Dec. 24, 2012, plaintiff West L.A. Grill & Cafe caught fire in the rear section of the dining room, causing the restaurant to close down. Plaintiff submitted a claim for benefits to LIG Insurance Co. doing business as Leading Insurance Co.

LIG denied plaintiff's claim for benefits, claiming that plaintiff did not maintain an operable UL 300 compliant fire suppression system in each of the Type 1 hoods installed at the restaurant, as required under the policy.

Plaintiff sued LIG claiming it was compliant. LIG cross-claimed for declaratory relief and rescission.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that all the hoods in its restaurant were UL 300 compliant and that LIG owed it benefits under the fire loss coverage policy. Plaintiff contended that the fire was unconnected with kitchen.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
LIG contended that plaintiff did not maintain the required UL 300 compliance as required by the Protective Safeguards Endorsement of the policy. LIG also rescinded the policy claiming plaintiff had misrepresented its eligibility by marking "yes" to the question regarding UL 300 compliance in defendant's questionnaire/checklist.

Result

Verdict for the defense. The court found that plaintiff did not maintain an operable UL 300 compliant fire suppression system in each of the Type 1 hoods at the restaurant, which was required under the Protective Safeguards Endorsement of LIG Businessowners policy. Therefore, defendant is not obligated to provide coverage to West L.A. Grill & Cafe. On the cross-claim, the court found that the question on the eligibility checklist was sufficiently vague and ambiguous that plaintiff's answer could have not been a misrepresentation and therefore LIG was not entitled to a rescission of its policy.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Sept. 26, 2013.