Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Ernest D. Sharp, Plaintiff-appellant,wausau Insurance Companies-part I, Intervenor-appellant, v. Johnson Brothers Corp., St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurancecompany, Centennial Insurance Company Andemployers of Wausau Insurance Co.-partii, Defendants-appellees.johnson Brothers Corp., and St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurancecompany, Defendants-appellants, v. Centennial Insurance Company, Defendant-appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. - 923 F.2d 46
Jan. 17, 1991
Kevin A. Galatas, New Orleans, La., for Sharp.
Joseph B. Guilbeau, Dean A. Sutherland, Sutherland & Juge, New Orleans, La., for Wausau Ins.-Part I.
Michael J. Maginnis, Timothy P. Hurley, McGlinchey, Stafford, Mintz, Cellinia & Lang, New Orleans, La., for Johnson Bros. and St. Paul Fire & Marine.
Robert B. Acomb, Jr., Richard D. Bertram, Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere & Denegre, New Orleans, La., for Centennial Ins. Co.
Elizabeth H. Ryan, Wood Brown, III, Montgomery, Barnett, Brown, Read, Hammond & Mintz, New Orleans, La., for Employers of Wausau-Part II.
Daniels Knowles, III, Wm. Daniel Wellons, Burke & Mayer, New Orleans, La., for St. Paul Fire & Marine.
Appeals from the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Louisiana; George Arceneaux, Jr., Judge.
Before GEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and SMITH1, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
In its application for rehearing, Centennial Insurance Company argues that our reversal of the district court's summary judgment in Centennial's favor precludes it from raising additional defenses. To make it abundantly clear that this was not our intention, we amend footnote 4 in the opinion to read as follows:
Centennial may be able to require St. Paul to share these expenses as a co-insurer. The district court did not reach this issue, and we express no opinion on it or any other defense available to Centennial that was not presented to the district court.
The petition for rehearing is DENIED.
District Judge of the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation