Search for: "Surety Insurance Company, Appeal of"
Results 121 - 140
of 147
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2010, 2:13 pm
Additional expenses will be incurred and extra work will be required to qualify an administrator-Surety Bond, additional costs and legal fees4. [read post]
23 Jan 2010, 6:00 am
American Surety Insurance Co.) held that bail was not forfeited when a defendant failed to appear at an arraignment. [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 11:09 am
Lin, individually and d/b/a Aptus Company, and Sung-Ping H. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 7:58 am
This was decided in Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. [read post]
28 Jun 2009, 6:47 am
Rep. 9, Andrews Insurance Coverage Litigation Reporter June 26, 2009A state appeals panel in Seattle has upheld a trial court's refusal to award damages for an insurer's bad faith in failing to promptly accept a general contractor's tender of defense as an additional insured on a subcontractor's policy. [read post]
1 May 2009, 3:30 am
Plaintiffs who have judgments on appeal secured by surety bonds will be able to collect from the surety bond issuer if they are successful on appeal, but the appeal will be stayed in the short-run. [read post]
16 Feb 2009, 2:55 am
Plaintiff Jurupa Valley Spectrum, LLC (“Jurupa”) is a beneficiary of certain surety bonds issued by Frontier Insurance Company, which were reinsured by National Indemnity Company (“NICO”). [read post]
11 Jan 2009, 8:44 am
Travelers paid the judgment, but the insurance company was none too happy the Brenneke also defaulted on paying the indemnity to Travelers on the surety bond.Not surprisingly, Travelers sued Brenneke. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 5:11 pm
ABERCIA & OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY v. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 6:18 pm
ABERCIA & OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY v. [read post]
23 Jun 2008, 8:30 pm
June 16, 2008) This appeal arose out of a lawsuit filed by a contractor, Stony Brook Construction Co. and its surety, Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland (F & D), against The College of New Jersey (TCNJ), in connection with the construction of a new three-story building on the TCNJ campus. [read post]
20 Jun 2008, 9:29 am
And the alternative may force the insured to sue numerous companies in one suit, if this is possible at all, to avoid inconsistencies. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 9:55 pm
Masara, supra, and AIU Insurance Company v. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 1:21 am
Defendant Hayward Construction Company was awarded the contract and Great American Insurance Company issued a performance bond for $4.5 million. [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 3:19 pm
RLI Insurance Company, et al , a 17-page opinion, Judge Najam writes:Old Republic Insurance Company ("Old Republic") appeals the trial court's order denying Old Republic's motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment to RLI Insurance Company ("RLI"), The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania ("ISOP"), First Specialty Insurance Corporation… [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 9:20 am
Partners, LLC., et al., a 9-page opinion, Judge Najam writes:Larry Keesling and Vivian Keesling ("the Keeslings") and Heritage Land Company ("Heritage Land") appeal from the trial court's in rem judgment in favor of T.E.K. [read post]
16 Jan 2008, 1:47 am
On appeal, however, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that the language of the “common cause” provision was ambiguous. [read post]
21 Dec 2007, 6:44 am
The Indiana Court of Appeals also found in Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. et. al vs. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 8:09 am
Here’s a neat little story out of the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly today on a Massachusetts Appeals Court decision holding that the surety on a construction contract does not cover, under the construction bond it issued, punitive damages awarded for the bad faith conduct of a principal of the construction company covered under the bond. [read post]
5 Aug 2007, 5:35 am
The excess insurer in this case, National Surety Corporation, argues that the primary insurer, Hartford Casualty Insurance Company, acted in bad faith by failing to settle a tort claim against their mutual insured, Sufix U.S.A., and thereby exposed Sufix to excess liability.1 National Surety seeks to step into Sufix's shoes, pursuant to the doctrine of equitable subrogation, to assert this bad-faith claim. [read post]
