United States v. Stuyvesant Insurance Company National Automobile and Casualty Insurance Company
This text of 453 F.2d 752 (United States v. Stuyvesant Insurance Company National Automobile and Casualty Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
453 F.2d 752
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
STUYVESANT INSURANCE COMPANY; National Automobile and
Casualty Insurance Company, Defendants-Appellants.
Nos. 71-2310, 71-2457.
United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.
Feb. 7, 1972.
Barry Tarlow (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendants-appellants.
Gerald L. Romanik (argued), Van Nuys, Cal., Harry D. Steward, U. S. Atty., Robert H. Filsinger, Chief, Civ. Div., Joseph A. Milchen, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, JERTBERG and ELY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment as to National Automobile and Casualty Company on a bail forfeiture is affirmed. The judgment against Stuyvesant Insurance Company is reversed. Judges Jertberg and Ely are of the view that in the circumstances of this case the bond of Stuyvesant was exonerated with the posting of the National bond which was accepted and filed by the district court.
Judge Chambers is of the view that after the "substitution", there appearing no written order of exoneration, Stuyvesant remained secondarily liable. He concedes that there is no suggestion that National is unable to satisfy the full judgment and therefore his point is theoretical.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
453 F.2d 752, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-stuyvesant-insurance-company-natio-ca9-1972.