Scottsdale Insurance Company v. Alfredo Ramirez et al
| Scottsdale Insurance Company |
| MGR Design International, Inc. and Alfredo Ramirez |
| 2:2017cv02855 |
| April 14, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Frederick F. Mumm |
| John F. Walter |
| Insurance |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
44
SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST MGR DESIGN INTERNATIONAL by Judge John F. Walter, this Court orders summary judgment in favor of Scottsdale and against defendant MGR. With respect to the first cause of action for rescission, the Court rules andjudges that t he Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy No. CPS1734059,effective May 23, 2013, to May 23, 2014, issued by Scottsdale to "Ramirez LaborManagement" (the "Scottsdale Policy") is rescinded and, is thus void ab initio as if it never existed. The Court specifically finds that rescission of the Scottsdale Policy terminates MGR's potential rights and obligations under the Scottsdale Policy as an additional insured. With respect the second cause of action for declarator y relief, the Court rules and declares that Scottsdale is not obligated to defend or indemnify MGR in an underlying lawsuit titled Olga Banuelos v. MGR Design International, pending inthe Superior Court of the State of California, County of Ventura, Case No. 56-2015-00474658-CU-PO-VTA. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (jp)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
