From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gen. Refractories Co. v. First State Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jan 30, 2012
CIVIL ACTION No. 04-3509 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 30, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION No. 04-3509

01-30-2012

GENERAL REFRACTORIES COMPANY v. FIRST STATE INSURANCE CO., et al. (Lexington Insurance Company and AIU Insurance Company)


ORDER

AND NOW, this 27th day of January, 2012, "Plaintiff General Refractories Company's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Against Lexington Insurance Company and AIU Insurance Company as to Their Counterclaims of Reformation and Rescission" (doc. no. 315) is granted. The counterclaims for reformation and rescission asserted by defendants Lexington Insurance and AIU Insurance Company (doc. no. 284 at 29-37) are dismissed with prejudice, and their cross-motion (doc. nos. 360, 361 (sealed)) is denied.

A memorandum accompanies this order.

BY THE COURT:

______________

Edmund V. Ludwig, J.


Summaries of

Gen. Refractories Co. v. First State Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jan 30, 2012
CIVIL ACTION No. 04-3509 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 30, 2012)
Case details for

Gen. Refractories Co. v. First State Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:GENERAL REFRACTORIES COMPANY v. FIRST STATE INSURANCE CO., et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jan 30, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION No. 04-3509 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 30, 2012)

Citing Cases

Robertshaw v. Pudles

Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a) and (b). "Intervention, whether by right under Rule 24(a) or by permission under Rule…

N. Jersey Media Grp., Inc. v. United States

Under either path to intervention, the motion to intervene must be timely. See, e.g. Gen. Refractories Co. v.…