Skip to main content

City of San Jacinto v. National Union Insurance

9th CircuitJanuary 6, 2004No. No. 02-56710; D.C. No. CV-00-00832-RT
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Farris, Fletcher, Wardlaw
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the City of San Jacinto's insurance coverage claim against National Union Fire Insurance Company and First State Insurance Company, holding that under the plain language of the insurance policies, coverage was not triggered because the bodily injury and property damage occurred in 1996, outside the policy period.

What This Ruling Means

**Case Summary: City of San Jacinto v. National Union Insurance** Unfortunately, the available information about this 2004 employment law case is extremely limited. The case involved a dispute between the City of San Jacinto and National Union Insurance that was filed in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on January 6, 2004. **What Happened:** The specific details of the employment dispute are not provided in the available case information. It appears to have involved some type of employment-related conflict between these parties, but the nature of the disagreement cannot be determined from the limited records. **What the Court Decided:** The outcome of this case is unknown based on the available information. No damages were reported, but this could mean either no damages were awarded or that this information simply wasn't included in the summary. **What This Means for Workers:** Without knowing the specific issues or outcome of this case, it's difficult to draw meaningful lessons for workers. However, the fact that it reached the federal appeals court level suggests it involved significant employment law questions. Workers should be aware that employment disputes can involve multiple parties, including insurance companies, and may require federal court intervention to resolve complex legal issues.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.