Fuller-Austin Insulation Co. v. Highlands Ins. Co.

Full title: FULLER-AUSTIN INSULATION COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HIGHLANDS…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Second District, Second Division

Date published: Feb 17, 2006

No. B170079 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 17, 2006)

Opinion

FULLER-AUSTIN INSULATION COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HIGHLANDS INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Defendants and Appellants. B170079 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Second Division February 17, 2006

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION

Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC116835

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on January 19, 2006, be modified as follows:

On page 56, eighth line, at the end of the first paragraph, following the sentence ending “to settle the action,� footnote No. 16 should be added stating: “Louisiana law is in accord. (E.g., Lafauci v. Jenkins (La.App. 1 Cir. 2003) 844 So.2d 19, 29; Rogers v. Government Employees Ins. Co. (La.App. 3 Cir. 1992) 598 So.2d 670, 672; Bye v. American Income Life Insurance Company (La.App. 1975) 316 So.2d 164, 166.)� All subsequent footnotes must be renumbered.

There is no change in the judgment.

Respondent’s petition for rehearing is denied.

BOREN, P. J. DOI TODD, J. ASHMANN-GERST, J.