From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leo A. Seltzer Enterprises, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Dec 12, 1956
239 F.2d 761 (6th Cir. 1956)

Opinion

No. 12834.

December 12, 1956.

Morris Garlove, Louisville, Ky., for appellant.

John P. Sandidge and R.P. Hobson, Woodward, Hobson Fulton, Louisville, Ky., for appellee.

Before ALLEN, McALLISTER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.


The appellant brought this action to recover under a contract of indemnity. The district court dismissed the complaint on the ground that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, in that it failed to allege compliance with the conditions of the contract as to notice and proof of loss, or that compliance with those conditions had been waived. The judgment of dismissal was entered only after the appellant had been given an opportunity to amend the complaint and had failed to do so.

Upon consideration of the record, briefs, and oral argument of counsel, we are of the opinion that the judgment of the district court is correct, and it is accordingly affirmed.


Summaries of

Leo A. Seltzer Enterprises, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Dec 12, 1956
239 F.2d 761 (6th Cir. 1956)
Case details for

Leo A. Seltzer Enterprises, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

Case Details

Full title:LEO A. SELTZER ENTERPRISES, Inc., Appellant, v. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Dec 12, 1956

Citations

239 F.2d 761 (6th Cir. 1956)

Citing Cases

Kaiser Trucking, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

"[I]f he fails to do so, the complaint is defective . . ." Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Nat. Cap. Area,…