Andrew Glassman v. Crown Life Insurance Company

12-55095Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOct 21, 2013

Full text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANDREW GLASSMAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CROWN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-55095
D.C. No. 2:11-CV-03576-SVW
(JCx)
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted October 10, 2013
Pasadena, California
Before: PAEZ and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and ERICKSON, Chief District
Judge.**
FILED
OCT 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Chief District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the District of North Dakota, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

Andrew and Marilyn Glassman appeal the district court’s dismissal of their
claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing against Crown Life Insurance Company and its successor Reassure America
Life Insurance Company (collectively “Crown Life”). We have jurisdiction pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d
734, 737 (9th Cir. 2001), we affirm.
The Glassmans contend that an Indexed Adjustment of Prior Average Monthly
Net Income Benefit rider (the “Rider”) entitled Mr. Glassman to periodic cost-of-
living adjustments on his total disability benefits. The language of the Rider
unambiguously applies only to partial or “residual” disability benefits, rather than total
disability benefits. See AIU Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 3d 807, 822 (1990).
Accordingly, the district court did not err in granting Crown Life’s motion to dismiss
the Glassmans’ claims. With this determination, the remaining issue regarding the
timeliness of those claims is moot.
For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s judgment dismissing the
complaint is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.