Reliance Ins. Co. v. Certain Member Companies, Institute of London Underwriters

• Decision Date: 01 January 1972
• Citation: 99 F.3d 402
• Parties: NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23. RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY and New York Marine & General Insurance Company, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CERTAIN MEMBER COMPANIES, Institute of London Underwriters, (General Accident "C" A/C, Assicurazioni Generali S.P.A., La Concorde Compagnie D'Assurances, Indemnity Marine Assurance
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Page 402

99 F.3d 402

NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23.

RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY and New York Marine & General Insurance Company, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CERTAIN MEMBER COMPANIES, Institute of London Underwriters, (General Accident "C" A/C, Assicurazioni Generali S.P.A., La Concorde Compagnie D'Assurances, Indemnity Marine Assurance 1/1/72, Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd., AG Belgium per Eagle Star, Sphere Drake Insurance Co. 2 A/C, Ocean Marine Insurance Co. Ltd., Guardian Royal Exchange (UK) Ltd., Gan Minster, AXA Marine and Aviation Insurance (UK) Ltd., Northern U/W Agency "J" A/C, Skandia Marine, L'Union des Assurances de Paris Group, Phoenix Assurance Co. Ltd., Maritime Insurance Co. No. 1 A/C and Terra Nova), Defendants-Appellants.

No. 95-7700.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Dec. 28, 1995.

Appearing for Appellants: John M. Woods, Thacher Proffitt & Wood, N.Y., N.Y.

Appearing for Appellee: David H. Fromm, Chalos & Brown, N.Y., N.Y.

Present KEARSE, MAHONEY, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was argued by counsel.

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in Judge Chin's Opinion dated June 1, 1995. We see no error of law, nor any clearly erroneous finding of fact. We have considered all of appellants' contentions on this appeal and have found them to be without merit. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.