Legal Opinion

Seelig v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided January 16, 1953No. Civ. A. 10310PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BYERS, District Judge.

This is an action upon a so-called Jewelers’ Block Policy, but what the adjective means has not been explained; its office may be merely to preserve the cryptic traditions of the calling pursued by underwriters.

The case was tried January 5 and 6, 1953, and decision is required as to motions not disposed of at the close of the trial.

The policy covers precious stones, jewelry and precious metals, constituting (a) property of the assured — the plaintiffs — (b) that of others entrusted to them “who are not dealers in such property or not otherwise engaged in the jewelry…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. E.M.M.I. Inc. v. Zurich American InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Nissel v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of LondonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. American Stone Diamond, Inc. v. Lloyds of LondonDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1996
  4. Steinzeig v. Mechanics and Traders Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  5. E.M.M.I. Inc. v. Zurich American InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004

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