This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


Insurance
Breach of Contract

Ramji Govindarajan v. Government Employee Insurance aka GEICO

Published: Oct. 9, 2020 | Result Date: Feb. 5, 2020 | Filing Date: Dec. 28, 2018 |

Case number: 18-cv-07797-JSC Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Jacqueline S. Corley

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

J. Curtis Edmondson
(Edmondson IP Law)


Defendant

Beau R. Mosman
(McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP)

James P. Wagoner
(McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP)


Facts

In a separate action, Rosebank Road Medical Services Ltd. doing business as Rosebank Medical Centre and Geeta Murali Ganesh filed a complaint for defamation in relation to reviews posted on a website called RateMDs.com. At the time, the complaint only identified "Does 1-20" as defendants. After conducting discovery, the defamation plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint and named Ramji Govindarajan as defendant. After a trial on the merits, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Govindarajan. Govindarajan, filed an insurance claim against defendant GEICO for the defamation claim that was asserted against Govindarajan.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff Govindarajan contended that GEICO Policy No. P8127665 for the policy period from May 28, 2016 to May 28, 2017 covered the defamation claim against Govindarajan. The policy named Govindarajan as insured and the terms stated that GEICO agreed to "pay damages on behalf of an insured." The term "damages" was defined as "personal injury" which included "defamation."

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that it was entitled to summary judgment because at the time of the alleged defamation was first published on the RateMDs.com website, the GEICO policy was not yet enforced. Therefore, the defamation insurance claim was outside of the scope of the policy.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment ruling that plaintiff Govindarajan did not satisfy the conditions to obtain insurance coverage from defendant for the defense of the defamation lawsuit.

Other Information

Plaintiff appealed the decision and the parties then settled the matter.


#135709

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390