|
2123 REVIEW GRANTED Under a policy that excluded liability for conduct of uninsured partners, an insurer did not have any obligation to defend a partner not designated by the policy as an insured; under a policy that did not exclude liability for conduct of uninsured partners, an insurer did have an obligation to defend an individual who was a partner in the insured entity.CitationPALMER v TRUCK INS (Uninsured Partner) 66 CA4 916 [See: Bank of the West v Superior Court 2 C4 1254, T/AT 9/92; Alex Robertson v Imperial 8 CA4 338, T/AT 10/92]
|
|
