Sacher v. Columbia Steamship Co.

Fifth Circuit

Sacher v. Columbia Steamship Co.

493 F.2d 1109, 1974 A.M.C. 2157, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8737

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 8, 1974

DocketNo. 74-1222

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 493 F.2d 1109 (Sacher v. Columbia Steamship Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sacher v. Columbia Steamship Co., 493 F.2d 1109, 1974 A.M.C. 2157, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8737 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The plaintiff-appellant was injured aboard the S.S. COLUMBIA BANKER, in the Pacific Ocean. The Vessel was owned by the Columbia Steamship Company, which, in turn, was insured by American Steamship Owner’s Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association, Inc. The policy of insurance was both written and delivered in the State of New York. The plaintiff attempted to bring suit against both his employer, the steamship company, and, through the [1110]*1110Louisiana Direct Action statute (LSA-P.S. 22:655), the insuror of his employer. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurance company on the ground that the Louisiana Direct Action statute cannot be applied against an insurance company with reference to an accident which did not take place in the State of Louisiana and where the policy was neither written nor delivered in that State.

Under the authority of Kirchman v. Mikula, 5 Cir., 1971, 443 F.2d 816 (citing Webb v. Zurich Insurance Company, 251 La. 558, 205 So.2d 398 (1967), the judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The plaintiff-appellant was injured aboard the S.S. COLUMBIA BANKER, in the Pacific Ocean. The Vessel was owned by the Columbia Steamship Company, which, in turn, was insured by American Steamship Owner’s Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association, Inc. The policy of insurance was both written and delivered in the State of New York. The plaintiff attempted to bring suit against both his employer, the steamship company, and, through the [1110]*1110Louisiana Direct Action statute (LSA-P.S. 22:655), the insuror of his employer. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurance company on the ground that the Louisiana Direct Action statute cannot be applied against an insurance company with reference to an accident which did not take place in the State of Louisiana and where the policy was neither written nor delivered in that State.

Under the authority of Kirchman v. Mikula, 5 Cir., 1971, 443 F.2d 816 (citing Webb v. Zurich Insurance Company, 251 La. 558, 205 So.2d 398 (1967), the judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 F.2d 1109, 1974 A.M.C. 2157, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sacher-v-columbia-steamship-co-ca5-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack