Legal Opinion

Newark Insurance v. Sartain

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 5, 1957No. Civ. No. 7457PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HALBERT, District Judge.

Defendants seek, under the provisions of Rule 43(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., to call, as a “managing agent” of an adverse (corporate) party, the agent of plaintiff from whom defendants allegedly purchased the insurance which is the subject matter of this action. The agent, A. Darwin Tuttle, is the sole agent for plaintiff in the town of Colusa, California, where he conducts his business as an agent for several insurance companies. In general, under the terms of his written agency agreement with the Newark Insurance Company (which agreement…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Lone Star Package Car Co., Inc. v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1954
  2. Moran v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
  3. Dowell, Inc. v. JowersCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1950
  4. Bach v. Friden Calculating MacH. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1948
  5. Krauss v. Erie R. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1954

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. June T. Inc. v. Arnold Ray KingCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
  2. Skogen v. Dow Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
  3. Schering Corporation v. CotlowArizona Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Libbey Glass, Inc. v. OneidaDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1999
  5. In Re Investigation of FMC Corp.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1977

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