Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “American General Life Insurance Company v. Zink”
Jeff Zink, et ux v. City of Mesapublic domain
FILED JUNE 14, 2018 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE JEFF ZINK & D
Jeff Zink, et ux v. City of Mesapublic domain
FILED JUNE 19, 2018 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III COURT OF APPEALS, DIVISION III, STATE OF WASHINGTON JEFF ZINK & DONNA ZINK, husband ) No. 34599-8-
Zink v. First Niagara Bank, N.A.public domain
DECISION AND ORDER HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT The above-referenced case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On October 20, 2015, Magistrate Judge McCarthy filed a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 94), recommending that plaintiffs uncontested Motion for Settlement (Dkt. No. 92) be denied. Per the Court’s November 5,
Grooman v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurancepublic domain
200 F.Supp.2d 523 (2002) J. Scott GROOMAN, v. NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. No. WMN-01-521. United States District Court, D. Maryland. April 22, 2002. *524 *525 Jennifer M. Horn, Venable Baetjer and Howard, LLP, Baltimore, MD, John H. *526 Zin
American Hospital Associationpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THE AMERICAN HOSPITAL : ASSOCIATION, et al., : : Plaintiffs, : Civil Action No.: 18-2084 (RC) : v. : Re Document Nos.: 2, 14
724 S.W.2d 561 (1986) Inez ZINK, et al., Appellants, v. EMPLOYERS MUTUAL LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF WISCONSIN, Respondent. No. WD 38005. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. December 16, 1986. Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied February 3, 1987. Application to Transfer Denied March 17, 1987.
American Wild Horse Campaign v. Zinkepublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AMERICAN WILD HORSE CAMPAIGN, et al., Civil Action No. 18-1529 (BAH) Plaintiffs, Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell v. DAVID BERNHARDT, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPIN
Stanley Boim v. American Muslims for Palestinepublic domain
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-3233 STANLEY BOIM, individually and as Administrator of the ESTATE OF DAVID BOIM, and JOYCE BOIM, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AMERICAN MUSLIMS FOR PALESTINE, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ________________
OPINION PATRICK A. PIRTLE, Justice. This is an appeal from an order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, Barker Roofing, L.P. (Barker) in a subro-gation lawsuit filed by Appellant, American *57 Zurich Insurance Company (AZIC), as Subrogee of the Varsity Golf Club, Ltd
Alabama Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Association of General Contractors Self-Insurer's Fundpublic domain
MURDOCK, Justice. The Alabama Insurance Guaranty Association (“the AIGA”) appeals from a summary judgment entered by the Montgomery Circuit Court against the AIGA and in favor of the Association of General Contractors Self-Insurer’s Fund (“the AGCSF”).1 The issue on appeal is whether the AGCSF may recover from the AIGA based upon a claim arising out of an insurance policy (“the Reliance policy”)
American Council of the Blind v. O'Neillpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AMERICAN COUNCIL OF THE BLIND, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 02-864 (BAH) v. Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell STEVEN T. MNUCHIN, Secretary of the Treasury, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiffs have, for the third ti
Weathers v. American Family Mutual Insurancepublic domain
793 F.Supp. 1002 (1992) Virginia K. WEATHERS, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 87-2557-O. United States District Court, D. Kansas. May 21, 1992. *1003 *1004 *1005 *1006
Taylor Energy Company LLC v. United Statespublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TAYLOR ENERGY COMPANY LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 20-1086 (JDB) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and through the UNITED STATES COAST GUARD NATIONAL POLLUTION FUNDS CENTER, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION As of 2004, plaintiff Taylor Energy Compa
Trinco Investment Company v. United Statespublic domain
In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 11-857L (Filed: October 31, 2018) ****************************************** * TRINCO INVESTMENT CO. AND * KATHLEEN G. ROSE, TRUSTEE OF * THE V. & M. ROSE - MARITAL TRUST, * Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Fifth
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL- ) CIO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:18-cv-1261 (KBJ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL- ) CIO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:18-cv-1261 (KBJ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL- ) CIO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:18-cv-1261 (KBJ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
DISSENTING OPINION BY Judge LEAVITT. Respectfully, I dissent. The Alabama Supreme Court held that a claim of the Alabama Association of General Contractors Self-Insurer’s Fund was covered by the Alabama Insurance Guaranty Association (Guaranty Association) under an insurance policy issued by Reliance Insurance Company (In Liquidation) to a group of self-insured plans. Now the Guaranty Association seeks recover
Rozek v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.public domain
512 N.E.2d 232 (1987) Robert ROZEK and Hazel Rozek, Appellants (Plaintiffs below), v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee (Defendant below). No. 49A02-8606-CV-224. Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District. September 2, 1987. *233 Gary L. Miller, Hollingsworth Meek & Miller, P.C., Indianapolis, for appellant
Addressograph-Multigraph Corp. v. Zinkpublic domain
273 Md. 277 (1974) 329 A.2d 28 ADDRESSOGRAPH-MULTIGRAPH CORPORATION v. ZINK ET UX. [No. 66, September Term. 1974.] Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided December 4, 1974. Motion for rehearing filed January 2, 1975. Denied January 8, 1975. The cause was argued before MURPHY, C.J., and SINGLEY, SMITH, DIGGES, L