Frederick v. TPG Hospitality, Inc.

D.C. Circuit

Frederick v. TPG Hospitality, Inc.

50 F. App'x 453

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedNovember 13, 2002

DocketNo. 00-7255

StatusPublished

This text of 50 F. App'x 453 (Frederick v. TPG Hospitality, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frederick v. TPG Hospitality, Inc., 50 F. App'x 453 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. It is

Ordered and Adjudged that the judgment of the district court be affirmed. The district court correctly concluded that the Aetna policy excludes coverage of TPG’s claim. Therefore it also correctly decided not to reach the question whether Aetna was TPG’s primary insurance provider.

We need not decide whether the endorsement provision applies only to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and not to TPG, because TPG failed to raise this issue before the district court. See Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. Dep’t of Labor, 159 F.3d 597, 605-06 (D.C.Cir.1998).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. RApp. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. R. 41.

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