Case Name: James SHOUSE and Yvonne Shouse, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. INDIANA LUMBERMENS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant, Security Insurance Company of New Haven, Charles Shorter and Maxine Shorter and Losantiville Building and Savings Company, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1966-04-29
Citations: 361 F.2d 969
Docket Number: No. 16317
Parties: James SHOUSE and Yvonne Shouse, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. INDIANA LUMBERMENS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant, Security Insurance Company of New Haven, Charles Shorter and Maxine Shorter and Losantiville Building and Savings Company, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 361
Pages: 969–970

Head Matter:
James SHOUSE and Yvonne Shouse, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. INDIANA LUMBERMENS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant, Security Insurance Company of New Haven, Charles Shorter and Maxine Shorter and Losantiville Building and Savings Company, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16317.
United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.
April 29, 1966.
John W. Morrison, Chicago, 111., Claus-en, Hirsh, Miller & Gorman, Norman A. Miller, Chicago, 111., Lindhorst & Dreidame, Leo J. Breslin, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief, for appellant.
Roy W. Short, Cincinnati, Ohio, Davis, Farley & Short, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief, for Security Ins. Co. of New Haven.
Preston M. Simpson, Cincinnati, Ohio, Simpson & Jacobs, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief for Charles & Maxine Shorter.
Alvin M. Loeb, Cincinnati, Ohio, Becker, Loeb & Becker, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief, for Losantiville Building & Savings Co.
Before EDWARDS, Circuit Judge, McALLISTER, Senior Circuit Judge, and KENT, District Judge.
Honorable W. Wallace Kent, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The above cause coming on to be heard on the briefs of the parties, the record, and the argument of counsel, and the Court being duly advised; now, therefore, it is adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the District Court be and is hereby affirmed on the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and opinion of Judge Peck, reported in 254 F.Supp. 989.