From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Banta v. United States

U.S.
Oct 3, 1977
434 U.S. 819 (1977)

Summary

holding that defective paneling sold was one occurrence because exposure during the sale and delivery process was continuous and repeated

Summary of this case from Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA

Opinion

Nos. 76-1502, 76-1668.

October 3, 1977.


C.A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 549 F. 2d 506.


Summaries of

Banta v. United States

U.S.
Oct 3, 1977
434 U.S. 819 (1977)

holding that defective paneling sold was one occurrence because exposure during the sale and delivery process was continuous and repeated

Summary of this case from Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA

using "implicitly deceptive methods to secure re-entry in the United States" was a "course of conduct directly contrary to a `policy reflected in our immigration laws.'."

Summary of this case from Catholic Social Services, Inc. v. Meese

noting that continuous exposure clause combines claims arising from "continuous or repeated exposure to conditions existing at or emanating from one location"

Summary of this case from Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Aetna Casualty Surety Co.
Case details for

Banta v. United States

Case Details

Full title:BANTA ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.; CITY OF ST. LOUIS ET AL. v. UNITED…

Court:U.S.

Date published: Oct 3, 1977

Citations

434 U.S. 819 (1977)

Citing Cases

Contreras-Aragon v. I.N.S

Forcing the alien to abandon the possibility of voluntary departure in order to seek review of the BIA's…

Uniroyal, Inc. v. Home Ins. Co.

Id. at 379 (extensive citations omitted). See also Abex Corp. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 790 F.2d 119, 127…