Dorothy Lilly and Donald Lilly v. John Roane, Incorporated

Fourth Circuit

Dorothy Lilly and Donald Lilly v. John Roane, Incorporated

337 F.2d 379, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 28, 1964

Docket9456_1

StatusPublished

This text of 337 F.2d 379 (Dorothy Lilly and Donald Lilly v. John Roane, Incorporated) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dorothy Lilly and Donald Lilly v. John Roane, Incorporated, 337 F.2d 379, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269 (4th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff has appealed from a summary judgment entered for the defendant, a corporation engaged in the adjustment of claims against its insurance company clients. It was brought on the theory that the defendant was responsible for the alleged wrong of officers in the office of West Virginia’s Fire Marshal. The plaintiff contended that the doctrine of respondeat superior was applicable because the defendant reported to the Fire Marshal’s office a fire which appeared to have been of incendiary origin, requested' prompt investigation of it and a copy of the Fire Marshal’s report, coupled with the fact that funds for the operation of the Fire Marshal’s office are derived entirely from taxes assessed by West Virginia upon fire insurance companies and measured by their West Virginia premium income.

The District Judge held that the officials of the Fire Marshal’s office were-discharging only their official duties as-prescribed by West Virginia’s statutes- and did not act under the direction or the-control of the defendant. We agree with, him that the record shows no agency relationship, and that summary judgment for the defendant was appropriate.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff has appealed from a summary judgment entered for the defendant, a corporation engaged in the adjustment of claims against its insurance company clients. It was brought on the theory that the defendant was responsible for the alleged wrong of officers in the office of West Virginia’s Fire Marshal. The plaintiff contended that the doctrine of respondeat superior was applicable because the defendant reported to the Fire Marshal’s office a fire which appeared to have been of incendiary origin, requested' prompt investigation of it and a copy of the Fire Marshal’s report, coupled with the fact that funds for the operation of the Fire Marshal’s office are derived entirely from taxes assessed by West Virginia upon fire insurance companies and measured by their West Virginia premium income.

The District Judge held that the officials of the Fire Marshal’s office were-discharging only their official duties as-prescribed by West Virginia’s statutes- and did not act under the direction or the-control of the defendant. We agree with, him that the record shows no agency relationship, and that summary judgment for the defendant was appropriate.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

337 F.2d 379, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorothy-lilly-and-donald-lilly-v-john-roane-incorporated-ca4-1964.