Grebow v. Fire Insurance Exchange CA2/2

Filed 4/21/23 Grebow v. Fire Insurance Exchange CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ARTHUR GREBOW et al., B320267

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 20STCV49903)

FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael P. Linfield, Judge. Affirmed. Grebow & Rubin and Arthur Grebow for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Woolls Peer Dollinger & Scher, Gregory B. Scher and Hugh Douglas Galt for Defendant and Respondent. ______________________________________

In this insurance coverage action concerning the theft of certain personal property, plaintiffs and appellants Arthur Grebow and Helen Grebow (collectively plaintiffs) appeal from the summary judgment entered in favor of defendant and respondent Fire Insurance Exchange (FIE) (erroneously sued as Farmers Insurance Exchange). We affirm the judgment. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs own a home in Tarzana, California. The home was burglarized on February 22, 2020. Sterling silver with an estimated value of $85,079.90, watches with an estimated value of $16,265, and jewelry with an estimated value of $2,512 were among the items stolen. None of the stolen items were recovered. The policy FIE issued to plaintiffs a homeowners policy that was in effect at the time of the theft. The policy provided coverage for, among other things, loss of personal property (Coverage C) up to a stated limit of $1,171,500. The policy prescribed special limits on certain types of personal property: “Special limits of insurance apply to certain types of personal property. The limits shown below do not increase the Coverage C stated limit. The limit for each numbered group is the total limit for any one loss event for all property in that group. The lowest applicable special limit shall apply to personal property that falls into more than one group.” As relevant here, section I.8 of the policy prescribed a $3,000 limit on theft of silverware: “8. Silverware, gold ware, platinumware and pewter ware. [¶] $3,000 limit on theft of silverware, gold ware, platinumware and pewter ware. This includes articles for which any such metal represents the principal value.” Section I.3 of the policy provided, subject to certain exceptions, contents replacement cost coverage for specified types of personal property under Coverage C: “3. Contents Replacement Cost – Coverage C. [¶] a. If the Declarations or renewal notice indicates that Contents Replacement Cost coverage applies, then covered loss or