Legal Opinion
Planet Insurance Company v. Mead Reinsurance Corporation, Integrity Insurance Company and Cochise County
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 6, 1986No. 85-1535PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BEEZER, Circuit Judge:
This appeal involves the relative obligations to pay legal fees of primary and excess insurers under Arizona law. The district court in this declaratory judgment action granted summary judgment in favor of Planet Insurance Company and Integrity Insurance Company, the County’s excess insurers. Mead Reinsurance Corporation appeals. We affirm.
FACTS
Mead insured the County of Cochise (“County”), Arizona, for damages arising from bodily injury, property damage, errors or omissions, or personal injury. Generally speaking, the policy provided that Mead would indemnify the County…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Semegen v. WeidnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Sparks v. Republic National Life InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1982
- Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- United States v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Lieutenant General William C. Gribble, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Helfand v. Nationall Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Federal Insurance Company v. Scarsella Brothers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Mead Reinsurance v. Granite State Insurance Company, Third-Party-Defendant-Appellant, and City of Richmond, Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Henein v. Saudi Arabian Parsons Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Angelo E. Tafoya v. Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust FundCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.