1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. OHIO CASUALTY COMPANY v. COX
 

OHIO CASUALTY COMPANY v. COX

Civil Action No. 11-334-HRW.

THE OHIO CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. BARBARA COX, et al., Defendants, v. JERRY HENRY, et al., Third-Party Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington.

March 28, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, Plaintiff, represented by Emily Helen Brooks , Ward, Hocker & Thornton PLLC, Gene F. Zipperle, Jr. , Ward, Hocker & Thornton PLLC, Benjamin A. Bellamy , Ward, Hocker & Thornton PLLC & Timothy D. Martin , Ward Hocker & Thornton PLLC.

Barbara Cox, Defendant, represented by Brendan John Shevlin , Wallingford Law, PSC, David Duane Wolfe , Wallingford Law, PSC, J. Whitney Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC, Mark A. Wohlander , Wohlander Law Office & William Nicholas Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC.

Barbara Cox, Executor defendant, represented by Brendan John Shevlin , Wallingford Law, PSC, David Duane Wolfe , Wallingford Law, PSC, J. Whitney Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC, Mark A. Wohlander , Wohlander Law Office & William Nicholas Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC.

Barbara Cox, ThirdParty Plaintiff, represented by Brendan John Shevlin , Wallingford Law, PSC, David Duane Wolfe , Wallingford Law, PSC, J. Whitney Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC, Mark A. Wohlander , Wohlander Law Office & William Nicholas Wallingford , Wallingford Law, PSC.

Jerry Catlett, ThirdParty Defendant, represented by Amber D. Nicely , Stites & Harbison, PLLC & Matthew W. Breetz , Stites & Harbison, PLLC.

David Henry, ThirdParty Defendant, represented by Amber D. Nicely , Stites & Harbison, PLLC & Matthew W. Breetz , Stites & Harbison, PLLC.

Western Surety Company, ThirdParty Defendant, represented by Amber D. Nicely , Stites & Harbison, PLLC & Matthew W. Breetz , Stites & Harbison, PLLC.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

HENRY WILHOIT, Jr., District Judge.

This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Barbara Cox's Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 49] and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Docket No. 50]. The motions have been fully briefed [Docket Nos. 53 54, 55 and 56]. For the reasons stated herein, the Court finds that factual issues preclude summary judgment.

BACKGROUND

This case...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases