Opinion of the Court — Tacoma Electric Supply Inc. v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 25, 2002
Case: Tacoma Electric Supply Inc. v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

*568 MEMORANDUM * OVERVIEW Tacoma Electric Supply, Inc. (“Tacoma”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of its property insurer, Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. (“Atlantic”). Tacoma argues that the earth movement exclusion Atlantic relied on to deny coverage for damage to Tacoma’s building is ambiguous because a reasonable reading of the exclusion covers only earth movement with observable ground surface manifestations. Tacoma contends that because there was no observable effect on the ground surface, summary judgment should have been granted in its favor and Atlantic must pay its damage claim. In the alternative, Tacoma argues that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether earth movement or bearing failure caused the damage. Because we agree that a genuine issue of material fact exists, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. DISCUSSION A. Standard of Review We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Guebara v. Allstate Ins. Co., 237 F.3d 987, 992 (9th Cir.2001). We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Tacoma, whether there are any genuine issues of materia…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.