CDM/I v. Reliance Ins. Co.

76 F.3d 385 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. CDM/I, a California Corporation; John U. Fry, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania Corporation; United Pacific Insurance Company, a Washington Corporation, Defendants-Appellees, G.D.C. Investment Co., Defendant-Cross-claimant-Appellant. No. 94-16724. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 11, 1996. Decided Feb. 1, 1996. Before: ALDISERT, * SCHROEDER and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 CDM/I, John U. Fry and G.D.C. Investment Co. appeal from a judgment of the district court interpreting an insurance policy to preclude two insurance companies' duty to defend their insureds. Appellants argue that the insurance companies owed them a defense in a lawsuit involving their alleged breach of a construction management contract. Appellants argue that this underlying action involved claims for defamation and disparagement covered by "personal injury"…