Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

ZURICH AMERICAN INS. CO. v. ACE AMERICAN INS. CO. # 2:11-cv-00881

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
2:11-cv-00881 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Zurich American Insurance Company
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Eastern District of California
Date Filed: 
Apr 1 2011

"55. Zurich American further alleges that it is not solely responsible for the defense of the District and the County in the three Underlying Actions and that ACE is liable, in part or in whole, for the attorney's fees, court costs, investigative costs and other costs in connection with defending the District and the County in each of the three Underlying Actions.
56. Zurich American's disproportionate payment of the entirety of the attorney's fees, court costs, investigative costs and other costs in connection with defending the District and the Count in each of the three Underlying Actions, and Zurich American's disproportionate payment of the entirety of the amounts to settle each of the three Underlying Actions, is due to the wrongful conduct of ACE in denying any duty to defend or indemnify the District and the County in each of the three Underlying Actions.
57. ACE's wrongful conduct includes, but is not lmited to, ACE's breaches of its Insurance Contract with its Additional Insureds, the District and the County, for its failure to defend the District and the County against the claims in each of the three Underlying Actions: the Arriaga action, the Cooper action and the Limon action.
58. ACE's wrongful conduct includes, but is not limited to, ACE's failure to indemnify Jacobs for the costs of the defense and indemnity of the District and the County which Jacobs agreed to pay pursuant to Paragraph 8 and Paragraph 9 of the Management Agreement.

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.