Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bolling Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance Society, Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided March 21, 1984No. 83-926Published

1DissentFerren, Associate Judge

I respectfully dissent because I believe there are genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment.

I

The release at issue provides:

WHEREAS, CUMIS Insurance Society, Inc. (“CUMIS”) issued a bond number CPC 09992 dated January 11, 1972, with various endorsements and renewals, to Bolling Federal Credit Union (“Bolling”);

WHEREAS, Bolling has made various claims under the bond for losses allegedly resulting from the unfaithful performance of its employees;

WHEREAS, CUMIS and Bolling have agreed to compromise the losses allegedly incurred by Bolling;

THE PARTIES THEREFORE AGREE:

In…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Turner v. American Motors General Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. Saslaw v. RosenfeldDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API