Goulart v. Crum & Forster Personal Insurance

Opinion

WIENER, Acting P. J.

In

Chrisman

v.

Superior Court

(1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 1465 [236 Cal.Rptr. 703] this court held that an insurer was not entitled to a trial de novo on the issue of damages following an arbitration award notwithstanding a provision in the insurance contract authorizing such a proceeding. We held Insurance Code section 11580.2

1

requires binding arbitration of uninsured claims and that to hold otherwise would thwart “the statutory benefits of finality and avoidance of costly time consuming judicial involvement in attempting to recover benefits from one’s own insurer.” (C

hrisman, supra,

at p. 1469.) In this case we have the converse situation. Does

Chrisman

apply to the insured who wants a de novo trial on the issue of damages following an arbitration award? We conclude that it does and accordingly affirm the order denying plaintiff Alvin Goulart a trial on damages.

[529]

I

Goulart was injured when the car he was driving was struck by a vehicle being driven by an uninsured motorist. Goulart sought payment for his injuries pursuant to the terms of the uninsured motorist provision contained in his automobile liability policy issued to him by defendant Crum & Forster Personal Insurance Company. In an arbitration proceeding the arbitrator awarded Goulart $35,000. Pursuant to the terms of his insurance contract Goulart sought a trial de novo on the issue of damages. The court ruled

Chrisman

applied and denied his request. This appeal ensued.

II

Goulart’s insurance policy with Crum & Forster permits further proceedings following an arbitration award where the award exceeds the statutory minimum bodily injury liability limit, here $15,000. The policy provides that where the amount exceeds that limit “either party may demand the right to a trial.” Where the demand is not made within 60 days of the arbitrators’ decision, the arbitration award is binding. The provision permitting a trial de novo in the Crum & Forster policy in this case is identical to the arbitration provision of the insurance contract in