Is a plaintiff's right to refuse to approve an assignment of an assignment that would have been approved as a matter of course?

In effect defendants are asserting that even though they would have approved the assignment as a matter of course, they should have the arbitrary right to disapprove it when the only apparent reason for doing so is that an intervening loss has occurred. The arbitrary refusal of consent in such circumstances would be inconsistent with the insurer's duty of good faith. (See Gruenberg v. Aetna Ins. Co., 9 Cal.3d 566, 573, 575, 108 Cal.Rptr. 480, 510 P.2d 1032.)