Legal Opinion

Intel Corporation v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 24, 1991No. 89-15165PublishedCited by 451 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (“Hartford”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Intel Corporation (“Intel”). The district court held that the insurance policy issued by Hartford to Intel covered expenses incurred by Intel pursuant to a consent decree it had entered into with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”); under the consent decree, Intel agreed to clean up toxic waste contamination at the site of a former manufacturing facility.

We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.

BACKGROUND

I

Intel is a manufacturer…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Egan v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Boeing Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1990

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by451 opinions

  1. Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. EstesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  2. Waller v. Truck Insurance Exchange, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Pioneer Exploration, L.L.C. v. Steadfast InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2014
  4. Hakim v. Massachusetts Insurers' Insolvency FundMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  5. Kingman Reef Atoll Investments, L.L.C. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008

446 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API