Arthur F. Smallfield v. Home Insurance Company of New York, a Corporation

Good Law
244 F.2d 337·1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3090
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 195713657California2,216 words

Opinion

Opinion

Denman, J.

Smallfield appeals from a judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of California, Central Division sitting in diversity in an action for declaratory relief brought by the Home Insurance Company, hereafter the Company or Appellee, absolving the Company from any liability on a certain policy of insurance covering named pieces of jewelry, and denying Smallfield, hereafter appellant, recovery for loss allegedly suffered by reason of an alleged theft of certain pieces of jewelry covered by said policy.

The present action was brought in October, 1950, and after a trial in the district court judgment was entered for appellant, and an appeal taken by the Company to this court. The Company then moved this court under F.R.Civ.P. rule 60(b), 28 U.S.C.A., to remand the case to the district court on the ground inter alia that judgment had been entered erroneously, that new evidence had been discovered, and that fraud had been perpetrated by Smallfield. This court granted the motion on August 13, 1953.

Thereafter the district court vacated its judgment and ordered a further hearing at the conclusion of which the judgment from which the present appeal is taken was entered.

The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.