Opinion ID: 598706
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: T.M.I.S. failed to submit an appellee brief

Text: 3 The Policy contains an express provision requiring Oregon Mutual to defend I.T.M.I.S. in any suit seeking damages payable under the policy, even though the allegations of the suit may be groundless, false, or fraudulent. This provision requires Oregon Mutual to defend I.T.M.I.S. even if it has knowledge that the allegations are groundless; this provision would not, however, create a duty to defend for claims which allege damages not potentially covered by the policy. Aetna 838 F.2d 350 3 Although the district court stated very clearly in the April 3, 1989, hearing that its final judgment considered only the First Amended Complaint, when the district court first considered the summary judgment issue on April 4, 1988, it appears to have relied upon the Third Amended Complaint. However, although there are differences between the wording of the Negligence action in the First Amended Complaint (13th Cause of Action) and Third Amended Complaint (5th Cause of Action), the analysis remains the same