Barbara and Christopher Westover v. Oregon Mutual Insurance Company
Published: Jul. 19, 1997 | Result Date: Mar. 12, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: C7227253 Verdict – $732,841
Judge
Court
Alameda Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Terrence J. Coleman
(Pillsbury & Coleman LLP)
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
C.L. Wysuph
(technical)
Facts
In 1991, the Oakland home belonging to plaintiffs Barbara and Christopher Westover, an architect and corporate attorney, was completely destroyed in the Oakland Hills firestorm. The plaintiffs claimed they lost over $800,000 in personal property, including numerous antiques and works of art. Their homeowners insurer, defendant Oregon Mutual, rebuilt the home but refused to pay more than $165,200 personal property loss, claiming that was its limit of liability as stated on the policy's declarations page. The plaintiff claimed the policy also contained a Replacement Cost Coverage endorsement for personal property, which provided coverage on a replacement cost basis for "each item of covered property" up to the applicable Limit of Liability. The defendant claimed the Replacement Cost Coverage endorsement for personal property provided coverage on a replacement cost basis, "per item," up to the applicable Limit of Liability. The plaintiffs claimed they were entitled to additional proceeds for the replacement cost of the lost items. The plaintiffs brought this action against the insurer and the insurance brokers based on breach of contract, negligence and bad faith theories of recovery. The plaintiffs settled with the defendant brokers before trial, and thereafter dismissed their negligence and bad faith claims.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiffs made a settlement demand to both defendants for $1.1 million. The defendant made no settlement offers.
Damages
The plaintiffs asked the jury to find the actual cash value of covered property to be $165,136.50 and the replacement cost value to be $732,841. The defendant asked the jury to determine that the actual cash value amount was not proven.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately three years and seven months after the case was filed. Before trial, the trial court ruled that the policy provided coverage on a replacement cost basis for those items of personal property whose actual cash value, in the aggregate, did not exceed the policy limit of $165,200. A jury trial followed to determine the actual cash value and replacement cost value of the covered property that was destroyed in the fire. POST TRIAL MOTIONS: The defendant's motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict are pending.
Deliberation
5 hours
Poll
12-0
Length
3 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390