Legal Opinion
Security Mutual Casualty Co. v. Rich
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 8, 1954No. Civ. A. No. 12610PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
WILLSON, District Judge.
Defendant filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A companion motion by defendant is' for a more definite statement, which must be ruled upon in the event that the motion to dismiss is refused.
Plaintiffs are non-resident insurance corporations and the defendant is an individual resident of this district. Jurisdiction is based on diversity and the cause of action arises in this district.
The complaint alleges substantially: In 1946 defendant entered into a written agreement with Equitable Gas…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Builders Supply Co. v. McCabeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Orth v. Consumers Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Borough of Brookville v. ArthursSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Brookville Borough v. ArthursSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Security Mutual Casualty Co. v. RichDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1956