Opinion ID: 714160
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Federal Court Declaratory Judgment Litigation.

Text: 12 In the meantime, Ziebart filed a declaratory judgment action against the insurers in Michigan state court, and the insurers removed the case to federal district court on diversity grounds. Ziebart sought declarations that the insurers had a duty to represent Ziebart on appeal, and that the insurers would be liable to Ziebart for losses associated with the wrongful death action. Because the issues were purely legal and no discovery was necessary, the parties agreed to resolve the matter on the insurers' motion for summary judgment. 13 The district court held that, since the Michigan jury found Ziebart guilty of an intentional tort, and since an intentional tort was the only theory under which LaDuke's estate could have effectively sued Ziebart, given the exclusive remedy provision of the Act, the insurers had had no duty to defend Ziebart at all, and certainly not on appeal. 3 Ziebart filed a motion for reconsideration. The district court denied that motion, reiterating that the insurers never had a duty to defend Ziebart. Ziebart then filed this appeal. 14