Frieda Rader and Paul Rader v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company of Philadelphia

Second Circuit

Frieda Rader and Paul Rader v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company of Philadelphia

255 F.2d 404, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4213

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 20, 1958

Docket24928

StatusPublished

This text of 255 F.2d 404 (Frieda Rader and Paul Rader v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company of Philadelphia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frieda Rader and Paul Rader v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company of Philadelphia, 255 F.2d 404, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4213 (2d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

255 F.2d 404

Frieda RADER and Paul Rader, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
MANUFACTURERS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 259, Docket 24928.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Submitted May 12, 1958.
Decided May 20, 1958.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and SWAN and LUMBARD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

While the allegations of the lengthy complaint herein are not overclear, it is quite apparent that plaintiffs are once more seeking to evade responsibility for the bail bond indemnity to which they have been held in a series of actions that they have initiated in the state and federal courts. These are fully described, with citations, in our latest decision, Rader v. Manufacturers Cas. Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, 2 Cir., 242 F.2d 419, of which, and the record on which it was based, we take judicial notice. There is no excuse for these many attempts to reopen issues thoroughly settled and now completely res judicata. We modify the judgment to provide for dismissal of the complaint on the merits.

Simon & Brand, Brooklyn, N.Y., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Edward H. Levine, New York City (Vernon C. Rossner, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

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

255 F.2d 404

Frieda RADER and Paul Rader, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
MANUFACTURERS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 259, Docket 24928.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Submitted May 12, 1958.
Decided May 20, 1958.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and SWAN and LUMBARD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

While the allegations of the lengthy complaint herein are not overclear, it is quite apparent that plaintiffs are once more seeking to evade responsibility for the bail bond indemnity to which they have been held in a series of actions that they have initiated in the state and federal courts. These are fully described, with citations, in our latest decision, Rader v. Manufacturers Cas. Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, 2 Cir., 242 F.2d 419, of which, and the record on which it was based, we take judicial notice. There is no excuse for these many attempts to reopen issues thoroughly settled and now completely res judicata. We modify the judgment to provide for dismissal of the complaint on the merits.

Simon & Brand, Brooklyn, N.Y., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Edward H. Levine, New York City (Vernon C. Rossner, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 F.2d 404, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frieda-rader-and-paul-rader-v-manufacturers-casualty-insurance-company-of-ca2-1958.