Response Time, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance

Good Law
97 F. App'x 726
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 7, 2004No. 02-17515; D.C. No. CV-00-00582-HDMCalifornia751 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Response Time, Inc. (Response Time) appeals from summary judgment in favor of Hartford Fire Insurance Company (Hartford) and also appeals from the district court’s denial of Response Time’s Motion for Reconsideration Based on Newly Discovered Evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I.

We review de novo the district court’s May 1, 2002, partial summary judgment. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Response Time, we determine that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law. See Lolli v. County of Orange, 351 F.3d 410, 414 (9th Cir.2003); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

The lawsuit filed against Response Time by Sterling Commerce, Inc. (Sterling) did not trigger Hartford’s duty to defend. Sterling made no charges against Response Time “that ‘arguably' or ‘potentially' bring the suit under the ... [advertising injury] provision[ ]” of the policy between Response Time and Hartford. Associated Aviation Underwriters, Inc. v. Vegas Jet, L.L.C., 106 F.Supp.2d 1051, 1053 (D.Nev.2000); see also Bidart v. Am. Title Ins. Co., 103 Nev. 175 , 734 P.2d…

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.