Arrowood Indemnity Company v. Macon County Greyhound Park, Inc.

11-10030Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit29.11.2011

Gesamter Gesetzestext

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
NOVEMBER 29, 2011
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 11-10030
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 3:08-cv-00812-MEF-CSC
ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY,
Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-
Appellee,
versus
MACON COUNTY GREYHOUND PARK, INC.,
a corporation,
Defendant-Counter Claimant-
Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Alabama
________________________
(November 29, 2011)
Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, COX, Circuit Judge, and GOLDBERG, Judge.*
PER CURIAM:
Honorable Richard W. Goldberg, United States Court of International Trade Judge, sitting*
by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

Arrowood Indemnity Company (“Arrowood”), the excess insurer, filed a
declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it had no legal duty to
indemnify its insured, Macon County Greyhound Park, Inc. (“MCGP”), for a
judgment against MCGP in excess of MCGP’s primary liability insurance coverage.
MCGP appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Arrowood
and the denial of MCGP’s motion for summary judgment.
MCGP presents three arguments on appeal: first, that the district court erred by
ruling as a matter of law that MCGP’s delay in giving notice violated the notice
provision of Arrowood’s excess liability insurance policy; second, that the district
court erred by deciding Arrowood was prejudiced by this delay; and third, that the
district court erred by concluding as a matter of law that MCGP was not protected by
the savings clause in the policy.
Having considered the briefs, relevant parts of the record, and having heard
oral argument, we reject MCGP’s arguments for the reasons stated in the district
court’s well-reasoned opinion. We affirm the district court’s grant of summary
judgment in favor of Arrowood and the denial of MCGP’s motion for summary
judgment.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.