Burt v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
District Court, N.D. Texas
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
CUMMINGS, District Judge.
Coming on for consideration are some five motions, including the motion of defendants Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., The Standard Fire Insurance Co., and The Auto Insurance Company of Hartford for summary judgment. After reviewing the motions, briefs, affidavits, depositions, and the record in this case, the Court is of the opinion that the motion for summary judgment should be granted as follows. The remaining motions will be dealt with after the following discussion.
FACTS
All causes of action asserted by the plaintiffs are predicated upon the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Lillian Washington, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Arsane Washington v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1988
- Ideal Mutual Insurance Co. v. Last Days Evangelical Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- Republic Insurance v. PiperDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Fantozzi Ex Rel. FantozziDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Rocky Mountain Casualty Co. v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1990