Legal Opinion
Certainteed Corp. v. Federal Insurance
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided November 17, 1995No. Civil Action 94-7526PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
RENDELL, District Judge.
Plaintiff CertainTeed Corporation (“Cer-tainTeed”) moves for partial summary judgment seeking a declaration that defendant Federal Insurance Co. (“Federal”) had a duty to defend it in the ease of Carlson v. Bay Mills, Ltd. et al, no. C2-92-001350 (Tenth Judicial District, County of Wright, State of Minnesota) (“Carlson ”). In the underlying complaint, plaintiff Bay Mills, Ltd. (“Bay Mills”) made a separate claim against Federal, seeking coverage under its policy for CertainTeed’s indemnification claim against Bay Mills. In addition, both Certain-Teed and Bay…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Standard Venetian Blind Co. v. American Empire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Gans, Curtis, G. v. Mundy, James F. And the Law Firm of Raynes, McCarty Binder & MundyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Pierringer v. HogerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kosierowski v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Elan Pharmaceutical Research Corp. v. Employers InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- Hyde Athletic Industries, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- Ihnat v. Pover, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1997
- Elan Pharmaceutical v. EmployersCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998