Marshall

Associated Indemnity Corp. v. Marshall

Good Law
71 F.2d 420·1934 A.M.C. 1386·1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 3113
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 31, 1934No. 7235California243 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Upon the authority of Associated Indemnity Corporation et al. v. Wm. A. Marshall, etc., et al., 71 F.(2d) 235 , this day decided, involving the same question here presented, the decision of the District Court is affirmed.

On Rehearing.

The appellant seeks rehearing in this ease on the ground that the situation with reference to the pleadings was somewhat different on this appeal from that in the companion case between the same parties, No. 7118, 71 F.(2d) 235 . We call attention to the difference stated by the appellant for the purpose of making more clear the fact that we have passed upon the question thus presented, as follows:

The counterclaim or set-off to which petitioner refers in this excerpt from his petition for rehearing is a claim based upon the contention that the award theretofore made by the deputy commissioner in favor of John Thomas was too great in amount. The effort is thus by way of cross-complaint to attack the decision of the commissioner after the period fixed by law for such an attack. The question involved is one of statutory construction. We think it is immaterial whether the attack is by way of intervention, as- in ease No. 7118, or by way of…

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.