Legal Opinion
Hydro Systems, Inc. v. Continental Insurance
District Court, C.D. California
Decided July 28, 1989No. CV 88-6652-RJK (GHKx)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
KELLEHER, Senior District Judge.
BACKGROUND
This is a diversity action for breach of an insurance contract. Plaintiff, Hydro Systems (“Hydro”), manufactures fiberglass bathtubs. The process involves three raw materials: fiberglass, gel coat, and resin. Gel coat and resin are chemical compounds consisting, in part, of a hydrocarbon known as styrene. During the manufacturing process, gaseous styrene is liberated from the gel coat and resin and is emitted into the air. The styrene is dispersed into the air by means of exhaust fans and stacks. The manufacturing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McLaughlin v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1983
- Intel Corp. v. Hartford Acc. and Indem. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1988
- Safeco Insurance v. GilstrapCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Allstate Insurance Company v. GilbertCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Cal-Farm Insurance v. TAC Exterminators, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. CBI Industries, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1995
- MacKinnon v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Sullins v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- Vantage Dev. v. American Env. Tech.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1991
- Hydro Systems, Inc. v. Continental Insurance Company, a New Jersey CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.