Arrowood Indemnity Company v. MacOn County Greyhound Park, Inc.
This text of 447 F. App'x 947 (Arrowood Indemnity Company v. MacOn County Greyhound Park, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Arrowood Indemnity Company (“Arro-wood”), the excess insurer, filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it had no legal duty to indemnify its insured, Macon County Greyhound Park, *948 Inc. (“MCGP”), for a judgment against MCGP in excess of MCGP’s primary liability insurance coverage. MCGP appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Arrowood and the denial of MCGP’s motion for summary judgment.
MCGP presents three arguments on appeal: first, that the district court erred by ruling as a matter of law that MCGP’s delay in giving notice violated the notice provision of Arrowood’s excess liability insurance policy; second, that the district court erred by deciding Arrowood was prejudiced by this delay; and third, that the district court erred by concluding as a matter of law that MCGP was not protected by the savings clause in the policy.
Having considered the briefs, relevant parts of the record, and having heard oral argument, we reject MCGP’s arguments for the reasons stated in the district court’s well-reasoned opinion. We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Arrowood and the denial of MCGP’s motion for summary judgment.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
447 F. App'x 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arrowood-indemnity-company-v-macon-county-greyhound-park-inc-ca11-2011.