Legal Opinion
Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided February 5, 2003No. S098242PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*938Opinion
KENNARD, J.
Through a series of agreements, plaintiff Henkel Corporation (Henkel) acquired the metallic chemical product line of Amchem Products, Inc. (Amchem No. I), 1 and assumed all related liabilities. The question here is whether Henkel also acquired the benefits of the insurance policies issued by defendants to Amchem No. 1 to cover lawsuits based on injuries sustained during the policy period.
Finding no specific language in the agreements assigning policies or policy benefits to Henkel or its predecessor, and no document in which defendant insurers consented to any assignment,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Comunale v. Traders & General InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Ray v. Alad Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977
- Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Admiral InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Trubowitch v. Riverbank Canning Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
- Northern Insurance Company of New York, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Allied Mutual Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Motor Vehicle Casualty Co. v. Thorpe Insulation Co. (In Re Thorpe Insulation Co.)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Globecon Group, LLC v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Docket No. 04-4399-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Glidden Co. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2006
- In Re Viking Pump, Inc. and Warren Pumps, LLC Insurance AppealsSupreme Court of Delaware · 2016
- Pilkington North America, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2006
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.