Ososki v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance

Sixth Circuit

Ososki v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance

60 F. App'x 602

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedApril 8, 2003

DocketNo. 01-2312

StatusPublished

This text of 60 F. App'x 602 (Ososki v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ososki v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance, 60 F. App'x 602 (6th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-Appellant Edward Ososki, doing business as Federal Oil Company, appeals an order of the district court granting summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company (St.Paul) in a lawsuit contesting St. Paul’s denial of insurance coverage. Having had the benefit of oral argument and after carefully considering the appeal record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to St. Paul. Because [603]*603reasoning that supports judgment for St. Paul has been articulated by the district court, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by this Court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning employed by that court in its memorandum and order dated August 6, 2001 and entered on that same date.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-Appellant Edward Ososki, doing business as Federal Oil Company, appeals an order of the district court granting summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company (St.Paul) in a lawsuit contesting St. Paul’s denial of insurance coverage. Having had the benefit of oral argument and after carefully considering the appeal record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to St. Paul. Because [603]*603reasoning that supports judgment for St. Paul has been articulated by the district court, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by this Court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning employed by that court in its memorandum and order dated August 6, 2001 and entered on that same date.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 F. App'x 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ososki-v-st-paul-surplus-lines-insurance-ca6-2003.