Legal Opinion

Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Carll & Ramagosa, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided August 24, 1966No. 15636PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

2Per curiam

This is a civil action in which the appellant sought an adjudication as to its possible obligations under a comprehensive liability policy issued to the appellee Carll and Ramagosa, Inc. The matter came before the court below on cross motions for summary judgment. The court, construing the policy, held that the appellant was under an obligation to defend certain tort actions and entered a partial summary judgment accordingly. The claims of the respective appellees as to the ultimate liability of the appellant were expressly reserved for determination after the tort actions…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marino v. NevittCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963
  2. Selmes Paul Funkhouser v. City of Newark, a Municipal Corporation of New Jersey, Defendant-Respondent, And/or the Port of New York Authority, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963

4Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cohen v. Owens & Co., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. The Fidelity And Casualty Company Of New York v. Carll And Ramagosa, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API