Court Opinion

ID: 9438516
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 05:43:37.7132+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:42.345958
License: Public Domain

IKUTA, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result on the ground that nothing in the Second Amended Complaint or the settlement agreement between Nes-hat and TransDimension eliminated the possibility that Goerner would face liability based on actions he took in his capacity as the chief executive officer of TransDimension. Cf. Bowie v. Home Ins. Co., 923 F.2d 705, 706 (9th Cir.1991). Because there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Goerner engaged in any of the wrongful acts alleged in the Second Amended Complaint in his insured capacity, there was a potential for coverage and Axis had a duty to defend. See Amato v. Mercury Cas. Co., 18 Cal.App.4th 1784, 1790, 23 Cal.Rptr.2d 73 (Cal.Ct.App.1993).