Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co., No. 8172.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtHICKS, ALLEN, and HAMILTON, Circuit
Citation111 F.2d 214
PartiesMARYLAND CASUALTY CO. v. PACIFIC COAL & OIL CO. et al.
Docket NumberNo. 8172.
Decision Date08 April 1940

111 F.2d 214 (1940)

MARYLAND CASUALTY CO.
v.
PACIFIC COAL & OIL CO. et al.

No. 8172.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 8, 1940.


Parker Fulton, of Cleveland, Ohio, (Bushnell, Burgess, Fulton & Chandler, of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellant.

E. J. Thobaben, of Cleveland, Ohio, (G. E. Romano and E. J. Thobaben, both of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellees.

Before HICKS, ALLEN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

111 F.2d 215

ALLEN, Circuit Judge.

The sole question here is whether the District Court erred in sustaining a demurrer to appellant's petition for a declaratory judgment filed under the provisions of Section 400, Title 28 U.S.C., 28 U.S.C.A. § 400.

Appellant issued a liability policy to the Pacific Coal & Oil Company under which it was obligated to defend all actions brought against the assured and, within the limitations of the policy, to pay all sums for which the assured should be liable for property damage or bodily injuries caused by automobiles hired by the assured. While the policy was in effect, appellee Orteca, driving his automobile, collided with a 1931 Ford truck operated by an employee of the Coal Company. Orteca brought suit against the Coal Company in the Common Pleas Court of Cuyahoga County, Ohio, but this action has not proceeded to judgment. The case is thus differentiated from Employers' Liability Assur. Corp. v. Ryan, 6 Cir., 109 F.2d 690.

Appellant brought the instant action in the District Court against the assured and Orteca, asking that the court determine appellant's obligation under the policy and decide whether it is obligated to defend the pending action in the state court. The petition alleged that the Coal Company claims to have sold the 1931 Ford truck to its employee who was operating it at the time of the accident, the Coal Company retaining title thereto as security for the payment of the purchase price. If the truck was owned by the company, and was not a hired automobile, appellant claims to have no obligation under the policy. Orteca demurred to the petition in the District Court for the reason that no cause of action against him is stated, and that he is not a necessary or proper party to the action, and the demurrer was sustained.

The determinative factor is whether a controversy exists between Orteca and appellant.

We think that the judgment of the District Court must be affirmed, upon the ground that no cause of action was stated against Orteca. The controversy...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Maryland Casualty Co v. Pacific Coal Oil Co, No. 194
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • February 3, 1941
    ...District Court sustained his demurrer and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co., 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. We granted certiorari on October 14, 1940, 311 U.S. 625, 61 S.Ct. 25, 85 L.Ed. —-, to resolve the conflict with the decisions of other Circ......
  • Maryland Casualty Co. v. Boyle Const. Co., No. 4831.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • November 10, 1941
    ...the nature of that controversy appears from an examination of the opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals rendered in the case. 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. The company was denying that its policy covered the truck which caused claimant's injury; and this controversy was entirely separate and dist......
  • Elbert v. Lumbermen's Mut. Cas. Co., No. 3548.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Western District of Louisiana
    • October 30, 1952
    ...that it did not "state a cause of action against him", which was sustained by the trial court and affirmed by the Court of Appeals in 111 F.2d 214. In disposing of the matter, the Supreme Court "The question is whether petitioner's allegations are sufficient to entitle it to the declaratory......
  • Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. O'Connor-Regenwether Post # 3633, Veterans of Foreign Wars, CONNOR-REGENWETHER
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1955
    ...insured. A demurrer to the petition was sustained in the federal district court and was affirmed in the Circuit Court of Appeals. 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. The Supreme Court of the United States reversed, holding as above [247 Iowa 172] A declaration of nonliability is within the scope of a jus......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Maryland Casualty Co v. Pacific Coal Oil Co, No. 194
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • February 3, 1941
    ...District Court sustained his demurrer and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co., 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. We granted certiorari on October 14, 1940, 311 U.S. 625, 61 S.Ct. 25, 85 L.Ed. —-, to resolve the conflict with the decisions of other Circ......
  • Maryland Casualty Co. v. Boyle Const. Co., No. 4831.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • November 10, 1941
    ...the nature of that controversy appears from an examination of the opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals rendered in the case. 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. The company was denying that its policy covered the truck which caused claimant's injury; and this controversy was entirely separate and dist......
  • Elbert v. Lumbermen's Mut. Cas. Co., No. 3548.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Western District of Louisiana
    • October 30, 1952
    ...that it did not "state a cause of action against him", which was sustained by the trial court and affirmed by the Court of Appeals in 111 F.2d 214. In disposing of the matter, the Supreme Court "The question is whether petitioner's allegations are sufficient to entitle it to the declaratory......
  • Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. O'Connor-Regenwether Post # 3633, Veterans of Foreign Wars, CONNOR-REGENWETHER
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1955
    ...insured. A demurrer to the petition was sustained in the federal district court and was affirmed in the Circuit Court of Appeals. 6 Cir., 111 F.2d 214. The Supreme Court of the United States reversed, holding as above [247 Iowa 172] A declaration of nonliability is within the scope of a jus......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT