Legal Opinion
Miller v. Harleysville Mut. Casualty Co.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided April 4, 1941No. Nos. 77, 76PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
POLLARD, District Judge.
These two actions, which involve a common question of law and fact, were on motion of all parties consolidated for a joint hearing and trial of all matters in issue in the actions. Rule 42, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. After the pleadings were closed, the defendant moved for judgments on the pleadings. Rule 12(c), R.C.P. For the purpose of passing on the motions, the defendant concedes that all allegations sufficiently pleaded by the plaintiffs must be taken as true. From the allegations of the complaints as amended and the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Newton v. Employers Liability Assur. CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
- Loughran v. Employers Mutual Indemnity Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
3Cited by3 opinions
- Clarke v. Harleysville Mut. Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
- The Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York v. Mrs. Claire B. Carpenter, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
- PBM Nutritionals, L.L.C. v. Lexington Ins.Richmond County Circuit Court · 2011