Thomas v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n
| Decision Date | 28 February 1955 |
| Docket Number | Docket 23288.,No. 177,177 |
| Citation | 220 F.2d 17 |
| Parties | Efthimi THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MUTUAL BENEFIT HEALTH AND ACCIDENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Alvin M. Stein, New York City (Gallop, Climenko & Gould, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Albert Hirst, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Before CLARK, Chief Judge, HINCKS, Circuit Judge, and SMITH, District Judge.
We agree with Judge Dawson's reading of the insurance contract. D.C.S.D. N.Y., 123 F.Supp. 167. Defendant belatedly suggests the existence of an issue of fact concerning plaintiff's denial of further insurance covering this loss other than that which she particularized in her affidavit. But the plaintiff's affidavit to the point is clear and precise. And the defendant, who for a year thereafter had opportunity through pre-trial examination of the plaintiff and of others to develop contradictory facts, if such existed, asserts nothing beyond unsubstantiated doubt as to the accuracy of the plaintiff's affidavit. Not thus easily may a litigant avoid the uses of summary judgment "to pierce the allegations of fact in the pleadings" to reach the essential core of truth. Engl v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 2 Cir., 139 F.2d 469, 472; Willingham v. Eastern Airlines, 2 Cir., 199 F.2d 623, 624; United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, 2 Cir., 200 F.2d 936, 943; Marion County Co-op. Ass'n v. Carnation Co., 8 Cir., 214 F.2d 557, 562; Appolonio v. Baxter, 6 Cir., 217 F.2d 267, 270; Byrnes v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y., 9 Cir., 217 F.2d 497, 500; Lawson v. American Motorists Ins. Corp., 5 Cir., 217 F.2d 724, 727.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lockhart v. Hoenstine
...1958), and an unsubstantiated doubt as to the veracity of the opposing affidavit is also not sufficient. Thomas v. Mutual Benefit Health & Acc. Ass'n, 220 F.2d 17 (2 Cir. 1955).7 We recognize that where, as here, a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for the protection of civil rights, "the c......
-
Bruce Construction Corp. v. United States, 16374.
...court-proved. This was either unsubstantiated doubt as to the accuracy of the sworn papers of the movant, Thomas v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Association, 2 Cir., 220 F.2d 17; Radio City Music Hall Corp. v. United States, supra, the optimistic hope that something might turn up, Moore......
-
Atlas v. Eastern Air Lines, Incorporated, 6014.
...the affiants in this regard at the taking of depositions. Consequently he cannot be heard now. Thomas v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n, 220 F.2d 17 (2nd Cir. 1955); Topp-Cola Company v. Coca-Cola Company, 185 F.Supp. 700 Finally, we cannot say that the district judge's refusal to e......
-
Dressler v. MV Sandpiper
...the award of summary relief. See, e. g., Engl v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 139 F.2d 469 (2d Cir. 1943); Thomas v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n, 220 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. 1955); City of Zephyrhills, Fla. v. Crummer & Co., 237 F.2d 338 (5th Cir. 1956); Duarte v. Bank of Hawaii, 287 F.2d 51 (9......