Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Royal Surplus Lines Insurance

ORDER

Sears, Roebuck and Co. (“Sears”) filed a complaint for breach of contract and declaratory judgment against Royal Surplus Lines Insurance Co. (“Royal”). It claimed that Royal wrongfifily had refused to defend and indemnify Sears in an underlying products liability action filed in a state court in California. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of *281Royal; it concluded that Royal owed no duty to defend or indemnify Sears. For the reasons set forth in the following order, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

1

In January of 1996, Sears contracted with Roadmaster…