Legal Opinion

Queen Ins. Co. of America v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided May 29, 1922No. 317PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtManton, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The District Judge examined into the cause of collision, and, from the testimony offered, incomplete as it is, concluded that the collision was due to faulty navigation. It was determined that the loss was not covered by 'the war risk policy, but was cohered by the marine policy, and the libel was accordingly dismissed. The provisions of the war risk policy assume all the consequences of hostilities or warlike operations, while the f. c. and s. clause of the marine policy excludes all consequences of hostilities or warlike operations. The appellee’s war…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. The TitaniaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1883
  2. Richelieu & O. Nav. Co. v. Boston Marine Ins. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1886

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Queen Insurance Co. of America v. Globe & Rutgers Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  2. Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
  3. Mantzoros v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Republic of China v. National Union Fire InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1957
  5. Crist v. United States War Shipping AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1947

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API