Legal Opinion
Underwriters Subscribing to Lloyd's Insurance Cert. No. 80520 v. Magi, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided October 17, 1991No. CS-90-0521-FVSPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
VAN SICKLE, District Judge.
A. PARTIES
The plaintiffs in this action are Underwriters at Lloyd’s London (hereinafter “Underwriters”). They request a judicial determination that an insurance certificate to which they have subscribed does not cover damage to apples which were stored in a warehouse operated by the defendant, Magi, Inc. (hereinafter “Magi”). Magi has filed a counterclaim. It asks the Court to hold Underwriters must pay the amount claimed, together with damages, attorney fees and costs.
B. JURISDICTION/VENUE
It is not disputed Underwriters are residents of Great Britain; Magi…
2Cases cited63 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hangman Ridge Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Berg v. HudesmanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- Industrial Indem. Co. of Northwest, Inc. v. KallevigWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- Boeing Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Ingenco Holdings, LLC v. Ace American Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- University of Cincinnati v. Arkwright Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
- Frank Coluccio Construction Co. v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Yale University v. Cigna InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2002
- Hillhaven Properties Ltd. v. Sellen Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.