In Wooster, the plaintiff alleged that he had purchased an automobile liability insurance policy from the defendant which required that the defendant not only pay damages on his behalf, but also defend him.
Summary of this case from Juedeman v. National Farmers Un. Prop1990.
[EDITORS' NOTE: PAGES 420 — 438 CONTAINING WOOSTER v. MIDCENTURY INS. CO. HAVE BEEN OMITTED.]
Deleted on direction of Supreme Court by order dated October 18, 1990.
In Wooster, the plaintiff alleged that he had purchased an automobile liability insurance policy from the defendant which required that the defendant not only pay damages on his behalf, but also defend him.
Summary of this case from Juedeman v. National Farmers Un. PropFull title:Wooster v. Midcentury Ins. Co
Court:Court of Appeal of California
Date published: Jan 1, 1990
A release has nothing to do with the obligation imposed on the insurer to pay amounts of coverage available…