Hartford Fire Ins Co v. Gray Corp, 07-60513 (2008)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 07-60513
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 05, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 5, 2008 No. 07-60513 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiff - Appellee v. PRIDE CONSTRUCTION INC Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The district court’s preliminary injunction order requiring Pride Construction,
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 5, 2008 No. 07-60513 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiff - Appellee v. PRIDE CONSTRUCTION INC Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The district court’s preliminary injunction order requiring Pride Construction, I..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 5, 2008 No. 07-60513 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiff - Appellee v. PRIDE CONSTRUCTION INC Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The district court’s preliminary injunction order requiring Pride Construction, Inc. to post collateral is affirmed. Pride is bound by its indemnity agreement to pay Hartford on demand the amount necessary to protect against all losses or expenses when Hartford determines that liability exists. There is ample evidence of the liability and potential difficulty in collecting the amount from Pride in this suit. The court’s order is within its authority and discretion. All outstanding motions are denied. AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Source: CourtListener
