Legal Opinion
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Caplan
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Decided December 3, 1993No. Civ. A. 92-2189PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING
LITTLE, District Judge.
The issues before the court on this motion and cross-motion for summary judgment eoncern the requirement of notice under a claims-made directors and officers’ liability insurance policy (“D & 0 policy”). The movant insurance company, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland (“F & D”), asserts that the insured directors and officers failed to comply with the notice requirement of the D & 0 policy. Therefore, F & D concludes that it is excused from all liability for the insureds’ alleged wrongdoing and it should be dismissed as a party defendant in this suit. The…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Pareti v. Sentry Indem. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
- Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. ElbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Livingston Par. Sch. Bd. v. Fireman's Fund Am. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1973
- Guaranty National Insurance Co. v. The North River Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- Davies v. Consolidated UnderwritersSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1942
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity v. Gus S. Mijalis, and Gus S. MijalisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- Sigma Financial Corp. v. American International Specialty Lines InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2002
- American Safety & Risk Services, Inc. v. Legion Indemnity Co.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2001
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. Virginia Surety Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1997
- Rtc v. American Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.