In plaintiff's suit against defendant for breach of its duty to defend and indemnify arising from antitrust lawsuits brought against plaintiff, summary judgment for defendants and dismissal of all of plaintiff's claims is affirmed as there are no allegations made against plaintiff in the antitrust complaints or amended complaints based on principles of successor liability, and the antitrust cases do not state claims that potentially or arguably fall within the purview of the asset purchase agreement duty to defend.
Argued: June 19, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 6, 2009
Opinion by Circuit Judge Marbley
For Appellant: James B. Niehaus, Frantz Ward, LLP., Cleveland, Ohio
For Appellee: Roxann E. Henry, Howrey LLP., Washington, DC