[Lyric] Appellant home builder (Posture Collar)

Appellant home builder sought review of a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County (California), which held that appellee commercial liability insurers did not have a duty to defend appellant against breach of contract actions by persons who bought properties from it.
Nakase Law Firm es un abogado laboralOverviewThe court affirmed the dismissal of appellant home builder's declaratory judgment action against appellee commercial liability insurers because there was no potential for coveragе and consequently no duty to defеnd the underlying lawsuits brought by home buyers against appellant. The court found that the home buyers' actions rested upon the contractual relationship between them and appellant and that nonaccidental acts arising out of breach of contract did not constitute an occurrence within the meaning of appellee's policies. The delays and increased costs in home construction complained of resulted in purely economic damages and as such did not constitute damage or injury to tangible property covered by appellee's comprehensive general liability policies. The policies' coverage for wrongful entry or eviction addressed disruptions of the buyers' ability to actually occupy the property, not mere injuries to the property, and appellee had no obligation where the buyers were not occupying the property when the events they complained of occurred.OutcomeThe court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of appellant homebuilder's declaratory judgment action against appellee commercial liability insurers because appellee did not have a duty to defend appellant against breach of contract actions by persons who bought properties from it. Nonaccidental acts arising from breach of contract and strictly economic losses were not covered by appellee's commercial general liability policies.