Court Opinion

ID: 9435455
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 00:05:50.198731+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:50.060752
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM*
“[T]he duty to defend, although broad, is not unlimited; it is measured by the nature and lands of risks covered by the policy.” Waller v. Truck Ins. Exch., 11 Cal.4th 1, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 370, 900 P.2d 619, 628 (1995). The policy here was a “foreign” general liability policy, and coverage was limited to “claim or suit resulting from an occurrence outside the United States of America, its territories or possessions, Canada, Cuba and North Korea.” Yet Nu-kote only conducted its business inside the United States, and any injury to Nu-kote resulted from an occurrence in the United States. Because there was no potential for coverage of Nu-kote’s counterclaims under the policy, ACE had no duty to defend.
REVERSED.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.