Case Number: BC504414    Hearing Date: August 08, 2014    Dept: 73

Department 73
Rafael Ongkeko, Judge presiding

SMILLIE, et al.

Plaintiff(s),
v.

STATE FARM, etc., et al.,

Defendant(s).

Case No.: BC504414

Hearing Date: 8/8/14

[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

Counsel for defendant/moving party: Anne Master (LHB, etc.)
Counsel for plaintiff/opposing party: Deborah Smillie for Heather Smillie; self-represented.

Defendant State Farm General Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication of issues (filed 5/22/14), as limited by the court’s order of 7/10/14.

Evidentiary rulings:
Defendant’s objections to plaintiff’s evidence: 1 through 24: Sustained.
Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.
Plaintiffs’ objections to defendant’s evidence: 1 through 7: Overruled.

The motion for summary judgment/summary adjudication filed by Defendant State Farm on the issue of the policy’s one-year suit provision is GRANTED. (Issues 1, 2, 3, and 4)

The undisputed facts establish that plaintiff’s complaint, filed on 3/29/13 is barred by the 1-year suit provision in the policy. (Defendant’s undisputed facts 1-24, and evidence cited therein.) The summary/chart provided in moving party’s motion, at 4:5-18 (and cut-and-pasted verbatim elsewhere in its papers on two other occasions for even more emphasis, unnecessarily), is an accurate reflection of the evidence regarding various dates relevant to the tolling issue.

Plaintiff’s evidence does not create a triable issue of material fact regarding the running of the one-year provision, much less plaintiff’s theory that defendant was continuously investigating the claim such that equitable tolling applies during the entire period between March 29, 2010 and April 19, 2012, or even other discrete periods therein, to render her complaint timely.

While this ruling does not immediately dispose of the entirety of the MSJ as to the other causes of action (e.g., a determination of whether certain claim(s) are “on the policy” and therefore barred), the parties are encouraged to meet and confer and determine what remains of the case and how those issues(s) should be addressed procedurally.

Unless waived, notice of ruling by defendant.