Legal Opinion
Nautilus Insurance v. International House of Pancakes, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided March 31, 2009No. Civil Action H-03-2182PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LEE H. ROSENTHAL, District Judge.
Nautilus Insurance Company (“Nautilus”) filed this declaratory judgment suit seeking to establish that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the International House of Pancakes (“IHOP”) and one of IHOP’s franchise owners in two underlying state-court suits. In each suit, a woman alleged that a manager employed in a franchised IHOP restaurant had sexually harassed and raped her. This court held that Nautilus had no duty to defend or indemnify IHOP or the owner of the franchises, Mohamad Amin, against the claims raised by one underlying…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lyda Swinerton Builders, Inc. v. Okla. Sur. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018
- Lyda Swinerton Builders, Inc. v. Oklahoma Surety Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017
- Small v. Bud-K Worldwide, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- Burlington Insurance Company v. Ranger SpecializedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018
- Burlington Insurance Company v. Ranger SpecializedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017