Coughenour v. State Auto Property and Cas. Ins. Co.

62 F.3d 1423 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Douglas Scott COUGHENOUR; Laura Roth-Coughenour, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. STATE AUTO PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, a South Carolina Corporation dba State Auto Insurance Companies; State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company, an Ohio Corporation dba State Auto Insurance Companies, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-55008. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 4, 1995. Decided Aug. 9, 1995. Before: FLETCHER, BRUNETTI, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Douglas Scott Coughenour and Laura Roth-Coughenour ("the Coughenours") appeal the district court's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction over their diversity action against State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company and State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company (respectively "P&C" and "Mutual"; collectively "State Auto"), seeking a declaration of benefits for damages and injuries sustained by…