Discovery
Civ-Pro
Case Summary |
|
2683 An action based on the claim that the insured lied about its intention to perform certain acts in return for claimants' granting it an easement, was not covered under a CGL policy clause covering "wrongful entry or eviction or other invasion of the right of private occupancy."CitationSTERLING v UNITED NAT'L (Lies for Easement) 79 CA4 105 [See: Gen Accident v West American 42 CA4 95, T/AT 3/96; Martin Marietta v INA 40 CA4 1113, T/AT 1/96; Tinseltown v Transportation 61 CA4 184, T/AT 3/98] |
|
|
|||||
|
|||||
Finz Case Law Summaries (Finz Advance Tapes)
|
|||||
Copyright by Pincus Legal Education, Inc. ©1992 - 2022
|
|||||