Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies
Judgment Against Insured Is Conclusive Proof Of Amount Of Claim Against Dissolved Insurer- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Woodside V. Seaboard Mut. Cas. Co., Michigan Law Review
Judgment Against Insured Is Conclusive Proof Of Amount Of Claim Against Dissolved Insurer- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Woodside V. Seaboard Mut. Cas. Co., Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiffs, injured in an automobile accident, brought suits against an insured taxicab company. Before the case came to trial, the insurance commissioner found the insurer insolvent. In a separate proceeding he obtained a court order dissolving the insurer, enjoining the prosecution of any legal action against the insurer's assets, and providing for the filing of proof of claims with the insurance commissioner. The insurer's attorney, who had entered an appearance on behalf of the taxicab company, withdrew, and in an undefended action the plaintiffs recovered judgments against the cab company totalling nineteen thousand dollars. Unable to obtain execution on these …
Federal Law Held To Govern Effect Of The Release Of A Joint Tortfeasor In Private Antitrust Suit-Winchester Drive-In Theatre, Inc. V. Twentieth Century Fox Film Co., Michigan Law Review
Federal Law Held To Govern Effect Of The Release Of A Joint Tortfeasor In Private Antitrust Suit-Winchester Drive-In Theatre, Inc. V. Twentieth Century Fox Film Co., Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Private antitrust litigation occasionally raises the question of whether state or federal law should be applied to determine the effect of the release of a joint tortfeasor. When federal law is applied, as it was in Winchester Drive-In Theatre, Inc. v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Co., there remains the necessity of formulating a rule of federal law, since there appears to be no established federal rule governing releases in antitrust suits.