Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Blazer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, under Nevada law, reimbursement for defense costs is allowed only if an agreement between the parties provides for reimbursement
• holding that under Nevada law, reimbursement for defense costs is allowed only if an agreement between the parties provides for reimbursement
• denying the 18 insurance company’s request for reimbursement because it presented no evidence of 19 the existence of such an understanding
• applying an assault and battery exclusions and noting that the Nevada Supreme Court has followed a policy of broad inclusive interpretation of such policies
• finding an assault and battery allegedly committed by bar patrons could constitute an “accident” from the perspective of the owner and thus could be an “occurrence”
• applying Nevada law to find term “arising out of” in policy exclusion unambiguous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).