Legal Opinion

New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided March 21, 1907No. 1,593PublishedCited by 7 opinions

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Middle District of Tennessee.

1Opinion of the Court

SEVERENS, Circuit Judge.

This is an action brought by the defendant in error, hereinafter called the “Telephone Company” against the plaintiff in error, hereinafter called the “Casualty Company,” upon a policy of insurance;—

“against loss from common law or statutory liability for damages on account of bodily injuries fatal or nonfatal, accidentally suffered by any person or persons not employed by the assured at or about any of tbe work of the assured described in tbe schedule indorsed hereon, caused by the negligence of the assured, and resulting from the work described in said schedule, and…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Schambs v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
  2. General Accident, Fire & Life Assurance Corp. v. Louisville Home Telephone Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
  3. Puget Sound Improvement Co. v. Frankfort Marine, Accident & Plate Glass InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Coast Lumber Co. v. Aetna Life Insurance Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Hertzka & Knowles v. SalterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

2 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