Montrose Chemical Corp. v. American Motorists Ins.

Good Law
926 F. Supp. 944·1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21280
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1995CV 94-5652-KN, CV 94-5851-KN and CV 94-5853-KN to CV 94-5857-KNCalifornia1,996 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kenyon, J.

ORDER Re: Travelers Indemnity Company’s Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions

Procedural Background

All seven of these cases involve the alleged duty of three insurance companies, American Motorists Insurance Company (“AMIC”), Travelers Indemnity Company (“Travelers”), and Insurance Company of North America (“INA”) to defend Montrose Chemical Corporation (“Montrose”) in suits involving seven sites polluted with DDT. Montrose initiated its first suit, CV 94-5519 WDK (BQRx), against the defendant insurance companies on August 12, 1994. This case was assigned to Judge William Keller, and involved the three insurance companies’ duties to defend a suit filed in California State Court entitled Brown & Bryant, Inc. v. Great Lakes Chemical Corp. Montrose dismissed this complaint without prejudice the same day it was filed. On August 18, 1994, Montrose filed CV 94-5652 KN (JRx). This case involved the three insurance companies’ duty to defend a suit entitled Alderman v. Cadillac Fairview/California. On August 26, 1994, Montrose filed six additional complaints: CV 94-5851 KN (JRx), CV 94-5853 KN (JRx), CV 94-5854 KN (JRx), CV 94-5855 KN (JRx), CV 94-5856 KN (JRx), and CV 94-5857 KN (JRx).

CV…

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.