Lexington Insurance Company v. Cindy Smith

Good Law
117 F.4th 1106
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 16, 202422-35784California13,809 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEXINGTON INSURANCE No. 22-35784

COMPANY; HOMELAND

INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW D.C. No. YORK; HALLMARK SPECIALTY 3:21-cv-05930-

INSURANCE COMPANY; ASPEN DGE

SPECIALTY INSURANCE

COMPANY; ASPEN INSURANCE

UK LTD; CERTAIN ORDER

UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

LONDON AND LONDON MARKET

COMPANIES SUBSCRIBING TO

POLICY NO. PJ193647; CERTAIN

UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO

POLICY NO. PJ1900131; CERTAIN

UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

LONDON AND LONDON MARKET

COMPANIES SUBSCRIBING TO

POLICY NO. PJ1933021; CERTAIN

UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO

POLICY NOS. PD-10364-05 AND

PD-11091-00; ENDURANCE

WORLDWIDE INSURANCE

LIMITED T/AS SOMPO

INTERNATIONAL SUBSCRIBING

TO POLICY NO. PJ1900134-A, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

CINDY SMITH, in her official capacity as Chief Judge for the Suquamish Tribal Court; ERIC NIELSEN, in his official capacity as Chief Judge of the Suquamish Tribal Court of Appeals; BRUCE DIDESCH, in his official capacity as Judge of the Suquamish Tribal Court of Appeals; STEVEN D.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.