holding that defective paneling sold was one occurrence because exposure during the sale and delivery process was continuous and repeated
Summary of this case from Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PANos. 76-1502, 76-1668.
October 3, 1977.
C.A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 549 F. 2d 506.
holding that defective paneling sold was one occurrence because exposure during the sale and delivery process was continuous and repeated
Summary of this case from Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PAusing "implicitly deceptive methods to secure re-entry in the United States" was a "course of conduct directly contrary to a `policy reflected in our immigration laws.'."
Summary of this case from Catholic Social Services, Inc. v. Meesenoting that continuous exposure clause combines claims arising from "continuous or repeated exposure to conditions existing at or emanating from one location"
Summary of this case from Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Aetna Casualty Surety Co.Full title:BANTA ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.; CITY OF ST. LOUIS ET AL. v. UNITED…
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 3, 1977
Id. at 379 (extensive citations omitted). See also Abex Corp. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 790 F.2d 119, 127…
Michaels v. Mutual Marine Office, Inc.) (quoted in American Home Assurance Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. N.J., 66 A.D.2d 269, 412 N.Y.S.2d 605, 610…