Legal Opinion

Continental Casualty Co. v. Woodward

District Court, M.D. North Carolina

Decided October 7, 2003No. CIV. 102CV00758Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BULLOCK, District Judge.

Plaintiff Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) filed this diversity action against Defendant Michael Woodward (“Woodward”) seeking a declaratory judgment that Continental is not obligated to compensate Woodward for an eye injury under his insurance policy. Woodward counterclaimed for breach of contract. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, both parties have moved for summary judgment on the issue of Continental’s payment obligation under the policy. Because neither party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, both motions will…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Cray Communications, Inc., Formerly Known as Dowty Communications, Incorporated v. Novatel Computer Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
  4. Bolich v. Provident Life & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. Richardson v. LIBERTY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

7 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