Certain Interested Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. Bear, LLC
District Court, S.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF NO. 71] AND DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE [ECF No. 110]
BARRY TED MOSKOWITZ, Chief Judge
Third-Party Defendant Marsh, USA Inc. (“Marsh”) has filed a motion for summary judgment. (Marsh’s Mot, Summ. J. (“Marsh’s MSJ”), ECF No. 71.) For the *1274reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This action arises out of an insurance coverage dispute under a marine insurance policy that Marsh brokered for a 102-foot motor vessel (“the Polar Bear”) owned by…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Memphis Community School District v. StachuraSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Certain Underwriters @ Lloyd's v. Bear, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Deer v. National General Ins. Co. (Dissent)Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2025