BROADCASTS.com

b'

Not Wise to Burden Appellate Court with Multiple Frivolous Motions\\n\\\\\\nAfter appellant Donya Entertainment, Inc. noticed a "very significant . .\\n . water intrusion" in a restaurant it had owned and operated for \\nseveral months, Donya submitted a claim to its insurer, respondent \\nFarmers Insurance Exchange. Farmers denied the claim, asserting it was \\nnot covered under Donya\'s policy. Donya sued Farmers alleging Farmers \\ninsufficiently investigated the claim before denying it. Farmers moved \\nfor summary judgment, arguing that the policy excluded claims for water \\nseepage that had been occurring for 14 days or more, and the undisputed \\nevidence demonstrated the water seepage had been occurring for at least a\\n year. The trial court granted Farmers\' motion, holding there could be \\nno liability for a defective investigation if there was no coverage \\nunder the policy.\\n\\nIn Donya Entertainment, Inc. v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, B315381, \\nCalifornia Court of Appeals (October 27, 2023) the Court of Appeals \\ndealt with multiple incompetent appellate motions and ruled in favor of \\nFarmers.\\n\\n\\nFACTUAL BACKGROUND\\n\\nIn May 2020, Donya sued Farmers, alleging that Donya operated a \\nfranchise restaurant in Rancho Cucamonga. Donya claimed it purchased the\\n operation from Bacon-Up Corporation in July 2019. Donya alleged \\nBacon-Up had an insurance policy issued by Farmers when it operated the \\nrestaurant, and that Donya had also insured itself with Farmers "under \\npolicy number 0606749543," which "provided coverage for Donya with \\nrespect to losses caused by water intrusion."\\n\\nSeveral months after Donya began operating the restaurant, "a very \\nsignificant experience of water intrusion occurred [,] adversely \\naffecting the kitchen and dining areas." Donya submitted a claim to \\nFarmers. Donya also alleged that "during this time," it learned the \\nrestaurant "had experienced similar water intrusion during the ownership\\n and operation" of Bacon-Up, and that Bacon-Up "had made alterations to \\nthe physical structure of the flooring in relation to that previous \\nwater intrusion."\\n\\nIn July 2020, Farmers filed its verified answer.\\n\\nFarmers Moves for Summary Judgment\\n\\nIn February 2021, Farmers moved for summary judgment. As to Donya\'s \\nclaim on its own insurance policy, Farmers contended "[t]here can be no \\ntort liability in the absence of coverage" and "the undisputed material \\nfacts establish that no coverage exists under the Policy" for Donya\'s \\nclaim. Farmers claimed that the water leaking had been going on for at \\nleast a year before Plaintiff reported it."\\n\\nAs to Donya\'s claim against Farmers on Bacon-Up\'s policy, Farmers argued\\n the obvious: that "a third-party claimant cannot sue the insurer of its\\n litigation adversary for breach of contract or bad faith, or failure to\\n properly investigate."\\n\\nRelevant here are the "Back Up of Sewers or Drains Coverage Endorsement" and the "Limited Coverage for Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and Bacteria