Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Capitol Indemnity v. Price Municipal, 02-4097 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Number: 02-4097 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 28, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 28 2003 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk CAPITOL INDEMNITY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 02-4097 (D.C. No. 2:99-CV-0141) PRICE MUNICIPAL (D. Utah) CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before LUCERO , McWILLIAMS , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges. We granted oral argument in this case in order to thoroughly consider the claims of error raised by the Appellant. Having now hea
More
F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 28 2003 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk CAPITOL INDEMNITY CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 02-4097 (D.C. No. 2:99-CV-0141) PRICE MUNICIPAL (D. Utah) CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before LUCERO , McWILLIAMS , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges. We granted oral argument in this case in order to thoroughly consider the claims of error raised by the Appellant. Having now heard oral argument, having carefully considered the parties’ briefs and authorities, and having reviewed the record, we find ourselves in complete accord with the well-reasoned and scholarly opinion of the district court. * This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. We will neither recite the facts which have been summarized by the district court, nor will we restate the claims of error as the parties are thoroughly familiar with them. Reviewing all arguments raised before us, including Appellant’s claim that one of the grounds relied upon by the district court — based on suretyship law — was not specifically pled in the complaint, we find no error which merits correction. For substantially the reasons stated by the district court we AFFIRM the judgment. ENTERED FOR THE COURT Carlos F. Lucero Circuit Judge
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer