Legal Opinion

Sharon Steel Corp. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided September 13, 1960No. Civ. No. 34214PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONNELL, District Judge.

This present motion by plaintiff for the production and copying of documents presently in the possesion of third-party defendant is an outgrowth of an action filed in Federal Court whereby plaintiff seeks recovery from Travelers’ Indemnity of over $3,000,000 in lost profits sustained by Sharon while an electric blooming mill motor insured by Travelers under a business interruption policy was being repaired by Westinghouse. Travelers, in turn, has impleaded Westinghouse on the theory that if Travelers is found liable to Sharon, then Westinghouse (hereinafter called…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Hayman v. Pullman Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1948
  3. Viront v. Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1950

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Xerox Corp. v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1974
  2. Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
  3. State v. Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1969
  4. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1962
  5. Ward v. ESTALEIRO ITAJAI S/ADistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2008

1 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