AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

IMPERIAL CASUALTY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. RADIATOR SPECIALTY COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM:

Imperial Casualty and Indemnity Company appeals an order of the district court requiring it to defend Radiator Specialty Company in twenty-six lawsuits alleging injuries resulting from occupational exposure to asbestos. We have considered the briefs and arguments of the parties, and we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated in its cogent memorandum opinion, which we adopt as our own. Imperial Casualty and Indemnity Co. v. Radiator Specialty Co., 862 F. Supp. 1437 (E.D.N.C. 1994), as amended, Imperial Casualty and Indemnity Co. v. Radiator Specialty Co., No. 93-209-CIV-5-D (E.D.N.C., Sept. 19, 1994).

The September 19 amendment simply corrected an error in the penultimate paragraph of the opinion, substituting "twenty-six" cases for "twenty-five." This correction does not appear in the published version of the opinion.

AFFIRMED

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IMPERIAL CASUALTY IND. CO. v. RADIATOR SPEC
(Oct 31, 1995)