Legal Opinion
Bowman Steel Corp. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided August 26, 1965No. Civ. A. No. 63-1073PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DUMBAULD, District Judge.
There used to be people holding themselves out as transportation consultants who would solicit a large shipper for permission to audit his freight bills, and would then have him sue the carriers for overcharges under applicable tariffs, taking for their compensation a contingent percentage of the recovery.
The present litigation seems to owe its origin to a similar display of zeal and ingenuity on the part of an insurance brokerage firm (Johnson & Higgins), successfully “bucking” for plaintiff’s account. The idea that the defendant insurance company might be liable…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Northern Securities Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Hauenstein v. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Sanitary District of Chicago v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- Bundy Tubing Company, a Michigan Corporation v. Royal Indemnity Company, a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bowman Steel Corp. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- Bowman Steel Corporation v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966