N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT SHARP PLUM B ING, INC ., a Ne va da c orporation, Third-pa

rty -pla i ntiff -c ounte rde fe nda nt - Appe lla

nt, v. NATIONAL FIRE & M AR INE INSUR ANC E C OM PANY, a Ne bra ska c orporation, Third-pa

rty -de fe nda

ntc ounte r-c la im a

n t - Appe lle e . No. 14-15172 D.C . No. 2:09-c v-00783-GMNGW F M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da Gloria M . Nava rro, C hie f Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 12, 2016 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia 

# F IL ED M AR 07 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.B e fore : NOONAN a nd M U R GUIA, C irc uit Judge s a n d M URPHY, ** Distric t Judge . Pla intiff Sha

rp Plum bing, Inc . (“ Sharp” ) a

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s gran t of sum

m ary judgm e n t in fa

vor of de fe nda

nt Na tiona l Fire & M arine Insura nc e C o. (“

N ationa l Fire ” ). The distric t c o urt he ld tha t Nationa l Fire ’ s c om m e rc ia l ge ne ra l lia

bility polic y una m biguously e xc lude d from

c ove ra ge c la im s brought a ga inst Sha

rp in a c la ss a c tion for Sha

rp’ s insta lla

tion of de fe c tive plum bing fittings. The

distric t c ourt a lso e n te re d sum m ary judgm e nt for Na

tiona l Fire on Sha

rp’ s c la im s for insura

nc e ba d fa ith a

nd viola tion of Ne va da ’ s Unfa ir C la im s Pra c tic e s Ac t, Ne v. R e v. Stat. § 686A.310. W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. Re vie wing de novo, Ly all v . C ity of Los Ange le

s , 807 F.3d 1178, 1185 (9th C ir. 2015), we a ffirm . 1. Sha rp a gre e s tha

t Nationa l Fire ’ s polic y

provide s c ove ra ge only

if the c la im s a ga inst Sha

rp in the c la ss a c tion a lle ge d da m a ge to prope rty

othe r tha n Sharp’ s own work produc t. Sha rp argue s tha

t the re is c ove ra g e be c a

use the dam a ge a lle ge d in the c la ss a c tion wa s to the wate r in the hom e s through z inc c onta m i nation. Howe ve r, Sha

rp doe s not point to a

ny e v ide nc e from the c la ss a c tion litiga

tion indic at ing tha

t da m a ge to wa

te r wa s e ve r an

e le m e n t of the ha

rm

** The Honora

ble Ste phe n Jose p h M urphy III, Unite d Stat e s Distric t Judge for the Ea ste rn Distric t of M ic higa n, sitting by

de signa t ion. 2a lle ge d in the suit. W hile the c la ss a c tion c om

pla i nt a n d a n e xpe rt a ffidavit a lle ge d that “ de z inc ific at i on” oc c urre d whe n wat e r ran through the plum b ing fittings insta lle d by

Sharp, the re is no indic ation tha t the z inc in the wate r wa s itse lf a ha rm . R athe r, the c onse que n c e s of de z inc ific ation we re le a k s, re stric t e d wate r flow, a nd bre a ka ge — not a dulte re d wate r. Profe ssor Ste m pe l’ s te stim ony , whic h wa s ba se d

on little m ore tha n his post-hocre a ding of thec la ss a c tion c om pla int, doe s not c ha

n ge this re sult. Se e Unite d State s v . Tamman , 782 F.3d 543, 552 (9th C ir. 2015) (“ [A] n e xp e rt c annot te stify to a m atte r of la

w am ounting to a

le ga l c onc lusion.” ). 2. Eve n if Sha

rp ha d sta te d a nd pre se rve d a

c a u se of a c tion for viola

t ion of Ne va da ’ s Unfa ir C la i m s Pra c t i c e s Ac t, Ne v. R e v. Stat. § 686A.310., its c l a im would fa il be c a

use Sharp doe s not point to e vide nc e tha

t it c om ple te d and subm itte d proof of loss re quire m e n ts or tha t Nationa l Fire ’ s lia

bility e ve r be c am e re a s ona bly c le ar, whic h a

re e l e m e nts of thesta

tutory viola tions a lle ge d by

Sharp. Se e Ne v. R e v. Stat. § 686A.310(1)(d) (listing as a n unfa ir pra c tic e “ [f] a iling to a ffirm or de ny c ove ra ge of c la im s within a re a sona ble tim e afte r proof of loss re quire me nts hav e be e n c o mple te d and submitte d by theinsure d

” (e m pha sis a dde d)); id. § 686A.310(1)(e ) (listing a s a n unfa ir pra c tic e “ [f] a iling to e ffe c tuate

3prom

pt, fa ir a nd e quita ble se ttle m e nts of c la im s in w hic h liability of the insure r has be c omere asonably c le ar ” (e m p ha sis a dde d)). 3. Ne va da

la w im pose s on insure rs a

c o ve na n t of good fa ith a

nd fa ir de a ling, a viola tion of whic h c a

n re sult in ba d-fa ith tort lia b ility . Allstate

Ins. C o. v . Mille r , 212 P.3d 318, 324 (Nev. 2009). C ourts ha ve re c ogniz e d tha

t the c ove na nt “ i m pose s a duty on the insure r to se ttle a

c l a im a ga inst its insure d within polic y lim its whe ne ve r the re is a substa ntia l like lihood of re c ove ry in e xc e ss of those lim its.” J

ohanse n v . C

al. State Auto Ass’n Inter-Ins. Bure au , 538 P.2d 744, 747 (C a l. 1975). Ge ne ra lly , howe ve r, “ an insure r ha s a duty to a c c e pt a

re a sona ble se ttle m e nt offe r only

with re spe c t to a c ov e re d c la im . ” De W

itt v . Monte r e

y Ins. C o. , 138 C a l. R

ptr. 3d 705, 707 (App. 2012) (inte rna l quota

tion m arks om itte d). As disc usse d a

bove , the c la i m s a ga inst Sha rp in thec la s s a c t ion we re not c ove re d by

the Nationa l Fire polic y . Eve n m ore proble m atic for Sharp is thefa c t that Nationa l Fire ultim ate ly

se ttle d the c l a ss a c tion within polic y lim its. Sha

rp points to no binding a

uthority re c ogniz ing, unde r Ne va da la w , a c la im for ba d fa ith re fusa l to se ttle e ve n in the a bse nc e of c ove ra ge , m

u c h le ss whe n the insure r ultim ate ly se ttle s within policy

lim its. Nor doe s Sharp argue tha t the Ne va d a Supre m e C ourt would a dopt suc h a rule . Se e Ork

in v . Tay lor , 487 F.3d 734, 741 (9th C ir. 2007) (“ If the sta te ’ s highe st a

ppe lla te c ourt ha s not de c i de d the que stion 4pre s e nte d, the n we m ust pre dic t how thesta

te ’ s highe st c ourt would de c ide the que stion.” ). As a re sult, Sha rp’ s c la im for insura

n c e ba d fa ith fa ils. AFFIRM E D

5