United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 98-3092 ___________ Technical Ordnance, Inc., * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of Minnesota. Hartford Accident and Indemnity * Insurance Company, sued as Hartford * [UNPUBLISHED] Accident and Indemnity Company, * * Appellant. * ___________ Submitted: May 12, 1999 Filed: May 20, 1999 ___________ Before McMILLIAN, HEANEY, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Insurance Company (Hartford) appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in Technical Ordnance, Inc.'s action to recover defense costs under a policy of insurance issued by Hartford. We review a grant of summary judgment under a well-established standard. Because this is a diversity action, we review de novo questions of state law. Having considered the record and the parties' briefs, we are satisfied the district court correctly applied the controlling state law and the record supports the district court's ruling. We also conclude a comprehensive opinion in this diversity case would lack precedential value. We thus affirm on the basis of the district court's ruling without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-