- 12 -
had the same meaning as unpaid losses in former section 806. The
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reached its ultimate
conclusion on the meaning of unpaid losses under former section
806 and construed the language of section 801 merely as support.
Making clear its marginal reliance on its interpretation of the
language of section 801, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit in Occidental Life Ins. Co. stated as follows:
Although an examination of section 801 along these
comparative lines is not required for a conclusion as
to the meaning of “unpaid losses” in section 806, our
interpretation of section 801 [now section 816] is
nevertheless persuasive in support of the result
which we reach. [United States v. Occidental Life
Ins. Co., supra at 5-6.]
The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has traditionally
accorded statements not necessary to its decision little
precedential weight. See, e.g., Export Group v. Reef Indus.,
Inc., 54 F.3d 1466, 1471-1472 (9th Cir. 1995) (“statements not
necessary to the decision” reflect dicta and not binding
precedent). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's
statements and analysis in Occidental Life Ins. Co. do not
clearly establish a position on the meaning of the term “unpaid
losses” under current section 816 that signals to us an
inevitable reversal upon appeal. Therefore, the Golsen rule is
not applicable to our resolution of the issue in this case.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011