Legal Opinion · Dissent

T & N, Plc, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Pennsylvania Insurance Guaranty Association, Appellee/cross-Appellant

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided January 3, 1995No. 93-2011 and 93-2012Published

1DissentRosenn, Circuit Judge

Many persons who charged that T & N was the alter ego of its subsidiary, Keasbey and Mattison Company (Keasbey), and therefore responsible for bodily injuries they sustained due to asbestos exposure, sued T & N. T & N thereupon filed a declaratory judgment action against American Mutual in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. T & N’s claim arose out of a policy naming Keasbey as the insured, although Keasbey had dissolved in 1967 (Maj. Op. at 176) and American Mutual had written its last policy to Keasbey in 1965. The court found that T & N was an additional insured…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Health-Chem Corp. v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
  3. National American Corp. v. Federal Republic of NigeriaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1978
  4. National American Corp. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria and Central Bank of NigeriaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
  5. Smith v. Commonwealth National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API