Opinion ID: 1382827
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: willfulness burden of proof

Text: (6) Hartford next contends that the trial court erroneously imposed upon Hartford the burden of proving that Lovelace had committed a willful act. [10] In Executive Aviation, Inc. v. National Ins. Underwriters (1971) 16 Cal. App.3d 799, 806 [94 Cal. Rptr. 347], it was held that the burden is on the insurer to bring itself within an exculpatory clause contained in an insurance policy. Hartford claims that this rule is not applicable here because the issue tendered to the jury was not based upon the exculpatory clause contained in the insurance policy, but rather upon exclusion of liability under Insurance Code section 533 (see fn. 1, ante ). Hartford urges that this statute represents a specific articulation in the insurance field of the broad rule of public policy set forth in Civil Code section 1668, [11] and that therefore it is the insured, rather than the insurer, who should bear the burden of demonstrating that his acts were not willful within its meaning. The provisions of Insurance Code section 533, however, have been held to be the equivalent of an exclusionary or exculpatory clause. (See Evans v. Pacific Indemnity Co. (1975) 49 Cal. App.3d 537, 540 [122 Cal. Rptr. 680]; Nuffer v. Insurance Co. of North America (1965) 236 Cal. App.2d 349, 356 [45 Cal. Rptr. 918].) [T]he burden of bringing itself within any exculpatory clause contained in the policy is on the insurer [citation]. ( Executive Aviation, Inc. v. National Ins. Underwriters, supra, 16 Cal. App.3d 799, 806; see also American Home Assurance Co. v. Essy (1960) 179 Cal. App.2d 19, 23 [3 Cal. Rptr. 586].) Placing the burden on Hartford to show that Lovelace's act was willful is also consistent with Evidence Code section 520. That section provides: The party claiming that a person is guilty of crime or wrongdoing has the burden of proof on that issue. (See Lane & Pyron, Inc. v. Gibbs (1968) 266 Cal. App.2d 61, 67 [71 Cal. Rptr. 817].) Hartford also attempts to sustain its position by asserting that although the insurer has the burden of bringing itself within an exculpatory clause contained in the insurance policy, this is not the case when the exclusion defines the scope of insurance provided by that policy, citing Zuckerman v. Underwriters at Lloyd's (1954) 42 Cal.2d 460 [267 P.2d 777]. The Zuckerman case, however, is clearly distinguishable. The policies there involved insured against `accidental bodily injury [including bodily injury which shall occasion death as defined in the policies]....' (42 Cal.2d at p. 473.) We held that the jury was properly instructed that plaintiffs, rather than the insurer, had the burden of showing that the death in question occurred by accidental means rather than by intentional self-injury, and that a part of this burden included the task of disproving intentional self-injury. The fact that an exclusion specifically withheld coverage for intentional self-injury, we held, did not operate to shift that burden. The burden of establishing suicide, therefore, should not have been put on the insurer [as the plaintiffs had contended], as the provision as to death from that cause was not a condition subsequent but merely definitive of the precise risk assumed. ( Id., at p. 474.) In the instant case, on the other hand, coverage agreement which is the basis of the insurance provided speaks in general, comprehensive terms, the insurer agreeing to indemnify the insured for all sums which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages and expenses, ... because of personal injury or property damage to which this coverage applies, occurring during the policy period. Clearly it cannot be said that the exclusion here in question, which appears with six others in a succeeding paragraph of the policy, was definitive of the precise risk assumed within the meaning of Zuckerman. In short, the exclusion here in question is a true exclusion within the meaning of the Executive Aviation case, not a definitional redundancy as was involved in Zuckerman.