T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T VA LE NTI AG GI O; DO ROTHY L. AG GI O; L I VI O J . AG GI O, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. E S T AT E OF J OS E P H A GG I O, DE C E AS E D, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee , v. S E Q U O I A I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y , in i t s c apa c i ty a s l i abi l i ty i ns ur e rf or D e f e nda ntT he E s t a t e of

J os e ph A ggi o, de c e a s e d, T hi rd-party- pl ai nt i ff - A pp el l ee , v. CO TA TI RO D A N D G U N CLU B; M A R V IN K . S O IL A N D , i n h i s c apac i ty a s tru s te e o f

th e M a r v in K . S o ila n d F a m ily T ru s t ; S T ON Y P OI NT R OC K Q UA R R Y, N o. 08- 16981 D . C . N o . 3 : 0 4 -cv -0 4 3 5 7 -P JH ME MOR AN DU M * 

# FI LED FEB 26 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS- 2-

I N C ., T h ir d - p a r ty - d e f e n d a n t. A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia P hy l l i s J . H a m i l t on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 10, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: O ’ S C A N N L A IN , T R O T T an d P A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. L i vi o, V al ent i , and D orothy A gg i o (the “ A gg i os”) appeal fr om the di stri ct c o u r t’s g r a n t o f

s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to S e q u o iaI n s u r a n c e C o m p a n y ( “S e q u o ia ” ) in thi s c ostre covery ac t i on brou gh tun der the C om prehensi ve E nv i ronm ent al R es po nse, C om pensat i on , and L i abi l i ty A ct(“ C E R C L A ”) , 42 U . S . C . § 9 60 7 et s e q ., a n d th e C a lif

o rn iaH a z a r d o u s S u b s ta n c e A c c o u n t A c t ( “H S A A ” ) , C a l. H e a lth & S a f e ty C ode § 25300 e ts e q. T he A ggi os s e e k r e c ove ry of r e s pons e c os t s a nd othe rda m a ge s f

r om the now - c l os e d e s t a t e of the i rde c e a s e d f

a the r , J os e ph A ggi o, i n con nect i on w i th the cl ea nu p o f c on t am i nat i on on i nh er i t ed re al prop erty l ocat ed i n C ot at i , C al i forni a. U nd erC al i forni a l aw , the A gg i os ar e perm i tt ed t o see k r e c o v e ry f

r o m th e c lo s e d e s ta te , b u t o n ly f r o m th e e s ta te ’s a v a ilab le in s u r a n c e . C AL . P ROB . C OD E § 5 5 4 ( a ) . T h u s , th e Ag g i o s s e e k r e c o v e ry u n d e rth e t e rm s o f two ne a r l y i de nt i c a l i ns ur a nc e pol i c i e s i s s ue d t o J os e ph by appe l l e e S e quoi a ( the- 3-

“ S e quoi a P ol i c i e s ” ) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291 t o r e vi e w the f in a l d e c is io n o f

th e d is tr ic t c o u r t. W e r e v ie w d e n o v o , Sn e a d v . Me tr o . P r o

p . & C as . I ns . C o. , 2 3 7 F. 3 d1 0 8 0 , 1 0 8 7 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 1 ) , a n d a f f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtgrant ed S equo i a’ s m ot i on for s um m ary j ud gm enton three sep arat e g ro u n d s. F i rst , th e co u rth el d th atth e S eq u o i a P o l i ci es’ “ o w n ed p ro p erty” e xc l us i on pr e c l ude d c ove r a ge f orthe A ggi os ’ c l e a nup e xpe ndi tur e s . S e c ond, the di stri ctcourthel d thatthe A gg i os’ cost s of per form i ng the vo l un t ary e nv i ronm ent al cl ean u p d i d n o tco n st i tu t e “ d am ag es” as req u i red t o tri g g er th e S eq u o i a P o l i ci es’ i n su ri n g ag reem en t . A n d th i rd , th e co u rth el d th atth e S eq u o i a P o l i ci es’ “ b u si n ess pu rs ui t s” exce pt i on al so fore cl osed coverage. A s t o the “ ow ne d pr ope r ty ” e xc l us i on, the di s tr i c tc our the l d tha tthe ex cl u si o n p recl u d es co v erag e fo r co st s i n cu rred t o cl ean u p o n e’ s o w n p ro p erty, ev en w h ere su ch m easu res p rev en tp o t en t i al fu tu re d am ag e t o th i rd -p arty p ro p erty. O n appe a l , the A ggi os a r gue tha tunde rC a l i f orni a l a w , w he r e the r e i s pot e nt i a l or threa t ened dam age t o the prop erty of others , the “ ow ned p roperty” excl usi on do es n o t ap p ly . I n de t e r m i ni ng the appl i c abi l i ty of the “ ow ne d pr ope r ty ” e xc l us i on, the r e le v a n t in q u iry is w h e th e rth e r e is “im m in e n t” d a n g e ro f th ir d - p a r ty c o n ta m in a tio n . Se e She l l O i l C o. v . W i nte r thurSw is s I

ns . C o. , 1 5 C a l. A p p . 4 th- 4-

7 1 5 , 7 5 8 (1 9 9 3 ) (h o l d i n g th at , u n d er an i n su ran ce p o l i cy’ s “ o w n ed p ro p erty” excl usi on , “ [e ] xp ense s s ol el y f or cl ea nu p o f f

i rs tparty property [ a] re no tcovered u n le s s th e y [ a ]r e n e c e s s a ry to p r e v e n t im m in e n t d a m a g e to th ir d p a r ty p r o p e r ty ” ) . N o n e o f th e c a s e s c ite d b y th e A g g io s in th e irb r ie f s m o d if y th is s ta n d a r d . See V a n n v. T ra vel ers C o s. , 39 C a l . A pp. 4th 1610, 1619 ( 1995) ( c i t i ng Sh e ll O il a nd hol di ng tha t“ w e do notbe l i e ve tha tthe s t a nda r d ‘ ow ne d pr ope r ty ’ e xc l us i on s h o u ld a u to m a tic a lly d e f e a t c o v e r a g e in s u its s e e k in g ‘c le a n u p ’ c o s ts d e s ig n e d to preventdam age t o thi rd part i es ”) ; T i tan C or p. v . A e tna C as . & Sur e t y C o. , 2 2 C a l. A pp. 4th 457, 473 ( h o ld in g th a t th e “o w n e d p r o p e r ty ” e x c lu s io n d id n o t ap p ly because there w as no ac tual or i m m i nentthrea tof dam age t o thi rd-party property) ; s e e al s o I nte l C or p. v . H ar t f or d A c c i de nt

& I nde m . C o. , 952 F . 2d 1551, 1555- 56 ( 9th C i r . 1991) ( hol di ng tha tthe “ ow ne d pr ope r ty ” e xc l us i on doe s notba rc ove r a ge of the c os t s of

pr e ve nt i ng f

utur e ha rm t o thi r d- pa r ty pr ope r ty , butnota ddr e s s i ng ho w i m m i nentthatthrea tm ustbe t o fal l w i thi n the excl usi on ). T hus , t o pr e ve ntappl i c a t i on of the “ ow ne d pr ope r ty ” e xc l us i on, the A ggi os m u s t d e m o n s tr a te im m in e n t h a r m to th ir d - p a r ty p r o p e r ty a t th e tim e o f th e ir c l e a nup e f

f or t s . W hi l e the r e i s a m pl e e vi de nc e of a pot e nt i a l f

orm i gr a t i on of cont am i nant s, the re cord di re ct l y r ef ut es the A gg i os’ cont ent i on thatthere w as i m m i ne ntda nge rof

s uc h m i gr a t i on. I n f

a c t , a 1996 e nvi r onm e nt a l a s s e s s m e ntof- 5-

the s i t e pr e pa r e d by the C a l i f orni a D e pa r tm e ntof

T oxi c S ubs t a nc e s C ontr ol ( “ D T S C ” ) s pe c i f

i c a l l y s t a t e d: “ N o i m m e di a t e pot e nt i a l ha z a r d t o he a l th orthe envi ronm entexi st s a tthe si t e w hi ch neces si t at es an em er gency r em ov al ac t i on . ” T h a t s a m e r e p o r t f

o u n d n o c o n ta m in a tio n o f g r o u n d w a te ra n d “v e ry little p o te n tia l” f o ra n y a irb o rn e tr a n s m is s io n o f th e c o n ta m in a n ts . T he A ggi os c i t e t o a 1998 r e m e di a l a c t i on w ork pl a n a l s o pr e pa r e d by the D T S C , w hi c h s t a t e s tha t“ [ t ] he onl y s i gni f i c a ntr i s ks t o the e nvi r onm e nta r e r i s ks pos e d t o a qua t i c or ga ni s m s i n the unna m e d dr a i na ge w hi c h tr a ve r s e s por t i ons of [the P roperty] . ” T he A gg i os ar gu e thatbecause the un nam ed drai nage di t ch e x te n d s o n to th ir d - p a r ty p r o p e r tie s , c o n ta m in a n ts in s u r f a c e ru n o f

f c o u ld m ig r a te off the prop erty vi a thi s di t ch. W hat everthe m er i tof thathypo thesi s, the re m edi al ac t i on w ork p l an di re ct l y c on tra di ct s the A gg i os’ cl ai m thatsuch m i grat i on w as i m m i ne nt . R a the r , the r e por ts t a t e s tha t“ the r e ha s be e n no s i gni f i c a nti m pa c ton th e w a te ra n d s e d im e n t o f th e d r a in a g e d itc h o ro n th e a q u a tic a n d s e m ia q u a tic r e c e pt or s . ” T hus , w e f

i nd tha tne i the rof

the D T S C r e por t s r e a s onabl y s uppor t s the c ont e nt i on tha tof

f - s i t e c ont a m i na t i on w a s i m m i ne nt . N orha ve the A ggi os pr ovi de d a ny othe re vi de nc e i n the r e c or d de m ons tr a t i ng i m m i ne ntha rm t o thi r dparty property. A l tho ug h the decl ar at i on subm i tt ed by the proj ec tm anager hi re d by the A ggi os i n 1994 s t a t e s tha tthe c ont a m i na t i on, “ i f notr e m e di a t e d, pos e d a- 6-

s ubs t a nt i a l thr e a ta nd r i s k of m i gr a t i on, ” i ti de nt i f

i e s no s pe c i f

i c e vi de nc e i n the r e c o r d o f a n y im m in e n t th r e a t. I n s um , w e hol d tha tthe A ggi os ha ve f a i l e d t o c r e a t e a ge nui ne i s s ue of m a t e r i a l f

a c ta s t o w he the rthe r e w a s a n i m m i ne ntthr e a tof c ont a m i na t i on t o thi r dpa r ty pr ope r t i e s . A c c or di ngl y , w e c onc l ude tha tthe “ ow ne d pr ope r ty ” e xc l us i on of th e S e q u o iaP o lic ie s ap p lie s to th e A g g io s ’ c le a n u p c o s ts a n d p r e c lu d e s r e c o v e ry . A s the A gg i os ar e there by fore cl osed fr om re covery , w e nee d n otaddres s the other tw o g r o u n d s u p o n w h ic h th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d e n ie d r e lie f . A ll p e n d in g m o tio n s a r e d is m is s e d a s m o o t. AF F I RME D.