|
1815 REVIEW DENIED In a dispute relating to coverage triggers between the manufacturer of artificial implantable heart valves and its insurers, the insured was entitled to discover from the insurers the identities of other medical device manufacturers who had notified the insurers of potential or pending claims, the types of devices involved in those claims, and what events had triggered potential coverage.CitationPFIZER v SUPERIOR COURT (Heart Valve) 59 CA4 840 [See: CCP 2017; Glenfed v Superior Court 53 CA4 1113, T/AT 5/97]
|
|
