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.

Construction
Construction Defect
Insurance Policy

Pacific Building Development Inc. v. Kensington – Fair Oaks Associates Joint Venture, et al.

Published: Oct. 27, 2012 | Result Date: Jul. 23, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1-06-cv-056857 Bench Decision –  $47,000

Court

Santa Clara Superior


Attorneys

Claimant

John W. Elliott

Mark S. Sandberg


Defendant

Elaine K. Fresch
(Hawkins, Parnell & Young LLP)

Peter Dye

Linda Wendell Hsu
(Selman Breitman LLP)


Facts

This case arose from a construction defect claim filed against Topa Insurance Co.'s insured, a general contractor that had its corporate status suspended during the course of litigation. Despite an underlying settlement and a release from the claimant, the release apparently did not apply to the Topa excess policy, allowing the claimant to continue its claim against the insured and to collect solely from the excess policy. Topa then filed a declaratory relief claim against the claimant asserting that there was no coverage.

Result

The Court ultimately found in favor of Topa on all points, and found that the claimant was collaterally estopped from relitigating a prior default judgment Topa had obtained against the primary carrier on the issue of whether the primary policies were properly exhausted. The Court also awarded Topa $47,000 in costs against the claimant.


#91881

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

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