# County of San Diego v. Ace Property & Casualty Insurance

> California Supreme Court · August 29, 2005 · 33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 583

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788514

## Case

- **Full name:** COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, Cross-Complainant and Appellant, v. ACE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY Et al.L Cross-Defendants and Respondents
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 29, 2005
- **Citations:** 33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 583; 37 Cal. 4th 406; 2005 Daily Journal DAR 10554; 118 P.3d 607; 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7798; 2005 Cal. LEXIS 9548
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Moreno
- **Judges:** Baxter, Werdegar, Moreno, Kennard
- **Cited by:** 73 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788514

## Opinion text

MORENO, J., Concurring.
I concur in the judgment. We were not asked to grant review to decide whether Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. Superior Court (2001) 24 Cal.4th 945 (Powerine I) and Foster-Gardner, Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. (1998) 18 Cal.4th 857 , should be overruled, nor were these issues addressed by the parties. (Cf. Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Companies (1988) 46 Cal.3d 287, 292 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 116 , 758 P.2d 58 ] [noting the arguments of counsel and amici curiae that our decision in Royal Globe Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1979) 23 Cal.3d 880 [ 153 Cal.Rptr. 842 , 592 P.2d 329 ] should be reconsidered].) I therefore concur under compulsion of the principles set forth in those cases. I am uncertain, however, of the soundness of these two decisions. (See Powerine I, supra, 24 Cal.4th 945, 975 (dis. opn. of Kennard, J.); Foster-Gardner, supra, 18 Cal.4th 857, 888 (dis. opn. of Kennard, J.).)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788514. Public record. Not legal advice.