Able Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Corp.

Good Law
33 F. App'x 276
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 2002No. 00-56735; D.C. No. CV-99-01322-GLTCalifornia750 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Able Corporation appeals the district court’s denial of Abie’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding Liberty Insurance Corporation’s duty to defend, and entry of judgment in favor of Liberty. The issue is whether the district court erred in applying California law when it held that Liberty had no duty to defend Able under the “advertising injury” provision of Abie’s comprehensive general liability insurance policy. Although denial of a motion for summary judgment is generally not a final order and therefore not appealable, we have jurisdiction because the denial disposed of all issues before the district court and the record has been sufficiently developed to support meaningful review of the denied motion. See Jones-Hamilton Co. v. Beazer Materials & Servs., 973 F.2d 688 , 693-94 & n. 2 (9th Cir.1992). We review a district court’s decisions regarding summary judgment de novo, Weiner v. San Diego County, 210 F.3d 1025, 1028 (9th Cir.2000), and affirm.

Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite them except as necessary.

First, Able argues that the district court incorrectly stated California duty to defend law and applied a test…

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.