Firco, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co

In Firco, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (1959) 173 Cal.App.2d 524, the appellate court concluded that the insurer had a duty to defend an action for trespass to trees, because, even though the policy exempted from coverage intentional acts, and the complaint alleged the trespass was malicious and intentional, trespass to trees can be committed involuntarily under Civil Code section 3346, and therefore, there was a possibility of coverage under the allegations of the complaint. (Firco, at p. 529.)