Sieckmann v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sieckmann v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company

321 S.W.3d 374, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 950, 2010 WL 2749642

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided July 13, 2010·No. ED 93459·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company (“C & F”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Brenda L. Sieckmann (“Sieckmann”). C & F alleges six points on appeal. Most of C & F’s points have to do with whether Interstate Brands Corporation (“IBC”) was an additional insured under the C&F policy.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company (“C & F”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Brenda L. Sieckmann (“Sieckmann”). C & F alleges six points on appeal. Most of C & F’s points have to do with whether Interstate Brands Corporation (“IBC”) was an additional insured under the C&F policy.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Sieckmann v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company, 321 S.W.3d 374, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 950, 2010 WL 2749642 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

321 S.W.3d 374 (Sieckmann v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.