U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1950

Loughlin v. Firemen's Ins. Co. Of Washington and George-Town

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided December 21, 1950 · Prettyman, Proctor, Bazelon

186 F.2d 357; 88 U.S. App. D.C. 109 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Jacob N. Halper, Washington, D. 1C., with whom Mr. Leonard B. Sussholz, Washington, D. C, was on the brief, for appellants., Mr. N. Meyer Baker, Washington, D. G, with whom Mr. Lucien H. Mercier, Washington, D. G, was on the brief, for appel-lee.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Kisting v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company (District Court, W.D. Wisconsin 1968)
Akers v. Liberty Mutual Group (District Court, District of Columbia 2012)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PROCTOR, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is from a judgment for defendant (appellee) in a suit on a fire insurance policy. At conclusion of all evidence the trial court directed a verdict for the insurance carrier upon several grounds, including the undisputed fact that assured (appellant) failed to comply with the demand of the carrier, made agreeably to terms of the policy, to submit to examination under oath and produce certain records. Uncontradicted evidence leaves no doubt that the requirement of the policy was knowingly and intentionally violated without reasonable justification or excuse, notwithstanding another valid provision which made compliance a condition precedent to suit. Cf. Roberto v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 7 Cir., 1949, 177 F.2d 811; American Macaroni Mfg. Co. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 1947, 164 F.2d 878; Gipps Brewing Corp. v. Central-Mfrs’. Mut. Ins. Co., 7 Cir., 1945, 147 F.2d 6; Merchant’s Ins. Co. v. Lilgeomont, 5 Cir., 1936, 84 F.2d 685. In our opinion the verdict was properly directed upon this ground. We need not deal with other grounds upon which the court acted.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.