Errors All Over The Place, Particularly In Grant Of Motions In Limine As Substitutes For Statutory Motions.

In an insurance coverage dispute, the trial court granted defendant’s motions in limine as substitutes for statutory motion of summary adjudication under Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, on the issue of the duty to defend, and on the statutory motion of nonsuit under Code of Civil Procedure section 581c, with regard to offset after settlement with other defendants. Since the appellate court independently reviews an order granting a motion for summary adjudication, that is what it did here with regard to the duty to defend issue. With regard to the offset issue, the appellate court stated it considered the motion in limine “as if it had been a motion for nonsuit after opening statement. As such, we review the trial court’s ruling de novo, viewing the evidence and offers of proof most favorably to [plaintiff], and resolving all presumptions, inferences and doubts in its favor; and we uphold the order granting [defendant’s] motion only if it is required as a matter of law.” In its appellate brief, defendant failed to cite to the record, and lost several of its arguments as a result of that omission. Apparently frustrated with defendant’s appellate briefing, the appellate court stated: “”After merits briefing of 152 pages and amicus briefing of 32 pages, for the very first time in its letter brief, [defendant] advises that” the parties entered into a stipulation. Not surprisingly, the judgment in favor of defendant was reversed and the matter was remanded. (McMillin Cos., LLC v. American Safety Indemnity Co. (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 1; January 22, 2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 518, [183 Cal.Rptr.3d 26].)