Seagate Technology, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

Good Law
11 F. Supp. 2d 1150·98 Daily Journal DAR 11477·1998 WL 428980·1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13322
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 15, 1998C-94-1999 DLJCalifornia2,725 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jensen, J.

ORDER

On April 8, 1998, the Court heard argument on ■ cross motions for summary judgment regarding St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company’s duty to defend. Dean A. Morehous, Jr. and Mary E. Wilcox appeared on behalf of plaintiff Seagate Technology, Inc; Stephen A. Scott and Dean A. Pappas appeared for defendant St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. Having considered the arguments of counsel, the papers submitted, the applicable law, and the record in this case, the Court hereby GRANTS summary judgment for St. Paul and DENIES summary judgment for Seagate as to St. Paul’s duty to defend.

I. BACKGROUND

A Factual Background and Procedural History

Seagate, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in California, manufactures disk drive storage devices for personal computers and small business machines. In June 1988, Amstrad, a United Kingdom corporation, began to purchase Seagate disk drives for its personal computers. In early 1989, Amstrad bégan seEing PC 2386 personal computers into which the Seagate drives had been incorporated.

On September 11,1991, Amstrad sued Sea-gate in Superior Court of California, Santa Cruz County, alleging that the ST277R drives,…

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.