Legal Opinion
Risdal v. Universal Insurance
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided July 16, 1964No. 63-45PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JULIAN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs have moved for summary judgment under Admiralty Rule 58 on their petition for a declaratory judgment brought under Admiralty Rule 59.
The facts are undisputed.
The plaintiffs were insured by the defendant corporation under a standard form of marine hull policy (Exh. 1) with respect to their fishing vessel “Eunice & Lillian” from March 26, 1958, to March 26, 1959, in the sum of $30,000.
The policy provided that the vessel, “for so much as concerns the Assured, by agreement between the Assured and Underwriters * * * is and shall be valued at $30,000.”
*473The policy…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Aetna Insurance v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- The St. JohnsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1900
- The LivingstoneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1904
- Aetna Ins. v. United Fruit Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rose & Lucy, Inc. v. F/V Saint Anna MariaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1968
- Rowan Companies, Inc. v. WIilmington Trust Company, Not in Its Individual Capacity but Solely as Owner Trustee of the Rowan-Halifax Jack-Up Rig, TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION, NORTH SEA INVESTMENTS, INC., and NORTH SEA (CONNECTICUT) LP, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2009
- Rowan Companies, Inc. v. Wilmington Trust, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2010
- Rowan Companies, Inc. v. Wilmington Trust, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2010