Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
ZURICH GENERAL ACCIDENT & LIABILITY CO., Limited, v. MID-CONTINENT PETROLEUM CO., 1930 — 43 F.2d 358 · caselaw · US
General
ZURICH GENERAL ACCIDENT & LIABILITY CO., Limited, v. MID-CONTINENT PETROLEUM CO.
43 F.2d 358·United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·1930
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
ZURICH GENERAL ACCIDENT & LIABILITY CO., Limited, v. MID-CONTINENT PETROLEUM CO.
No. 173.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Sept. 22, 1930.
Ralph F. Potter, of Chicago, Ill., and R. A. Kleinsehmidt, of Tulsa, Okl. (Cassels, Potter & Bentley, of Chicago, Ill., and Kleinschmidt & Johnson, of Tulsa, Okl., on the •brief), for appellant.
R. H. Wills, of Tulsa, Okl. (J. C. Denton, J. H. Crocker, I. L. Lockewitz, and H. M. Gray, all of Tulsa, Okl., on the brief), for appellee.
Before LEWIS, COTTERÁL, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The appellee has formally moved for relief from interest accruing on the judgment herein during the pendency of the appeal. (C. C. A.) 43 F.(2d) 355. The motion is based on the ground that appellee was prevented meantime from paying the judgment. If the record sustained the position taken, the relief would be properly granted. Bates v. Dresser, 251 U. S. 524, 40 S. Ct. 247, 64 L. Ed. 388. But it appears from the judgment entry that the tender of $7,500 was abandoned, when appellee sought to withdraw its answer and file an amended answer “denying any liability whatsoever to the plaintiff,” and moved for judgment to that effect. Appellee’s contest of the entire demand precludes allowance of the motion. It is therefore overruled.