Home Ins. Co. v. Highway Ins. Underwriters

53 So. 2d 298, 1951 La. App. LEXIS 778
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided June 29, 1951·No. No. 3399·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff Ivan Carline filed an application for rehearing based primarily on the case of National Retailers Mutual Insurance Company v. American Fidelity and Casualty Company, La.App., 51 So.2d 842, decided by the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. We do not believe the cited case apposite for the reason that in that case the plaintiff was made a party-appellee without any change in the nature or extent of the claim and the Court held that the filing of this supplemental petition naming the assured as a party plaintiff was the curing of a technical defect as to parties plaintiff, whereas in the present case Car-line is not accepting the petition as filed but is asserting an independent claim on his own behalf and which was not contained or included in the original suit. It cannot be said that Carline was made a party plaintiff to cure a technical defect. He has come in as a plaintiff after more than one year and is attempting to enforce his claim not previously asserted and we believe that our original opinion is correct and the motion for rehearing is therefore denied.

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

Home Ins. Co. v. Highway Ins. Underwriters, 53 So. 2d 298, 1951 La. App. LEXIS 778 (La. Ct. App. 1951).

53 So. 2d 298 (Home Ins. Co. v. Highway Ins. Underwriters) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wiggins v. Creary
475 So. 2d 780 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1985)
National Surety Corp. v. Standard Accident Insurance Co.
168 So. 2d 858 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1964)
Falls v. Employers' Liability Assur. Corp.
104 F. Supp. 256 (W.D. Louisiana, 1952)