Skip to main content
· 1/23/1996

Bituminous Casualty Corporation, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant v. Advanced Adhesive Technology, Inc., Defendant-Counter-Claimant, Georgia Pad, Inc.

Citations

  • 73 F.3d 335
  • 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 836
  • 1996 WL 5625

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that the exclusion clause contemplated “environmental contamination,” and rejecting a broader application to consumer claims
  • construing insurance policy so as to \most accurately reflect[ ] the intention of the parties to the insurance contract\
  • carpet mastic gave off toxic gases in a confined boat cabin space causing death not within exclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hatchett, Dubina, Black

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.