Fluor Corp. , et. al. v. Superior Court Of The State Of California, County Of Orange
Year 2010
Court California Supreme Court
Case Number S. 196592
Issue
  • Anti-assignment Clause
State
  • California

Overly strong and incredibly broad interpretation of the anti-assignment language that the insurer was trying to invoke. Had the insurer’s interpretation been accepted, insurers could deny the transfer of any CGL policy to any successor in interest, a conclusion that would drastically affect the worth and usefulness of occurrence based policies.

Related Docs
Author This brief was written by Amy Bach, Esq.
Related Cases
Fluor Corp. , et. al. v. Superior Court Of The State Of California, County Of Orange
Year: 2010
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S. 196592
Issue:
  • Anti-assignment Clause
State:
  • California

Overly strong and incredibly broad interpretation of the anti-assignment language that the insurer was trying to invoke. Had the insurer’s interpretation been accepted, insurers could deny the transfer of any CGL policy to any successor in interest, a conclusion that would drastically affect the worth…
Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court of Orange County, CA. (Real Party in Interest Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.)
Year: 2012
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S205889
Issue:
  • Anti-assignment Clause
State:
  • California

This case involves an insurance company’s effort to cut off the coverage/protection rights of one of its insureds based on a clause prohibiting assignments without the insurer’s consent. The insured is a construction company that paid substantial premiums to the insurance company in return for…