Legal Opinion

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Shihada

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 7, 1967No. 66-391PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

PEARSON, Judge.

The appellant was the garnishee in an action after judgment. The appellee, gar-nishor, was the plaintiff in the principal action. The appellant, an insurance company, appeals the final judgment in garnishment upon the ground that the evidence before the trial judge established as a matter of law that the insurance contract was violated by the tort-feasor’s failure to co-operate.

The evidence relied upon in an attempt to establish that the findings of the trial judge are against the manifest weight of the evidence is: (1) Two written statements of the tort-feasor taken by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. American Fire and Casualty Company v. VlietSupreme Court of Florida · 1941
  2. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation v. LucasCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1934
  3. Glens Falls Indemnity Co. v. LingleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. ShihadaSupreme Court of Florida · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API