Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, and New Hampshire Insurance Company, Plaintiff/counter-Defendant/appellee v. C.D.J.T., Inc., Dba Theodore R. & Company, and Nygard, Inc., Defendant/counter-Claimant/appellant

56 F.3d 70 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, Plaintiff, and New Hampshire Insurance Company, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/Appellee, v. C.D.J.T., INC., dba Theodore R. & Company, Defendant, and Nygard, Inc., Defendant/Counter-Claimant/Appellant. No. 93-56634. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 5, 1995. Decided May 30, 1995. Before NOONAN, O'SCANNLAIN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Nygard, Inc. ("Nygard") appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to New Hampshire Insurance Company ("New Hampshire"). We affirm. 3 * Under California law, an insurer's duty to defend arises whenever a suit "potentially seeks damages within the coverage of the policy." Gray v. Zurich Ins. Co., 54 Cal. Rptr. 104, 111 (1966) (emphasis in original). In determining whether such potentially covered claims exist, "the ultimate question is whether the facts alleged do fairly apprise the…