Legal Opinion

Joyner v. Continental Insurance Companies

District Court, S.D. Georgia

Decided December 20, 1983No. CV483-421PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

EDENFIELD, District Judge.

Pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 37(a), Plaintiffs move this Court to compel Defendant Continental Insurance Companies (“Continental”) to answer Plaintiffs’ interrogatories. Defendant opposes Plaintiffs’ motion on the ground that the information sought is privileged under F.R.C.P. Rule 26(b)(3).

I. Background

Plaintiffs allege that they were insured by the Defendant when a fire destroyed their residence on May 29, 1983. They further allege that they complied with Continental’s claim procedure, but that the Defendant has in bad faith refused to make payment to them. In…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. The Duplan Corporation v. Moulinage Et Retorderie De Chavanoz, Deering Milliken, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1975
  3. APL Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1980
  4. Carver v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 1982
  5. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Transamerica InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1972

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Bowne of New York City, Inc. v. AmBase Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
  2. Allstate Indem. Co. v. RuizSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
  3. Martin v. Valley National BankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1991
  4. Laxalt v. McClatchyDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1987
  5. Auto Owners Insurance v. Totaltape, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 1990

11 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