Opinion ID: 3009691
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: action against hartford

Text: 9 Air Products also instituted a diversity action under Pennsylvania law seeking a declaratory judgment against Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (Hartford). Hartford was its insurer from June 1, 1953 to September 30, 1972. Air Products sought a declaration that Hartford breached its duty to defend it in underlying actions based on employee exposure to Air Products' welding rods during the period of its coverage. Hartford essentially takes the same position as Aetna on the duty to defend issue. As we said in that case, Aetna's position is contrary to Pennsylvania law covering the duty to defend here. If Pennsylvania law is to be changed, it must be for the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to do so. Again, we affirm the district court on this claim.