Legal Opinion

Holland v. Fuller

District Court, E.D. Tennessee

Decided March 27, 1936No. 142PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, District Judge.

This case is now before me on cross-defendant American Surety Company’s motion to dismiss defendant’s cross-bill, the only ground of which to be given consideration in this memorandum is that a provision of the fidelity bond sued upon provides: “At the earliest practicable moment, and at all events not later than ten days after the insured shall discover any loss, the insured shall give the underwriter notice thereof by registered letter or telegram, addressed to it at its home office, and shall also, within three months after such discovery, furnish the underwriter at…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Burgess v. SeligmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Thompson v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Riddlesbarger v. Hartford InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  4. Railroad Co. v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  5. Security Nat. Bank of Sioux City v. Old Nat. Bank of Battle CreekCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Federal Savings & Loan Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1988
  2. Arcon Corp. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1983
  3. Arcon Corp. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API