Protective National Insurance Company of Omaha, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Safety National Casualty Corporation, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

19 F.3d 28 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. PROTECTIVE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF OMAHA, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. Nos. 92-56163, 93-55015. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 2, 1994. Decided Feb. 18, 1994. Before: D.W. NELSON, REINHARDT, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 This case involves a contract dispute between two insurance companies, Protective National Insurance Company of Omaha ("Protective") and Safety National Casualty Corporation ("Safety"). Both companies provide coverage to the insured corporation, Pedus Security Services ("Pedus"). Protective argues that Safety is liable for $126,151.70 in defense costs that were incurred in defending Pedus against a wrongful death action. Safety, on the other hand, argues that Protective is liable for the defense costs. 3 The district court held that Safety was liable…