Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Bloomington Steel & Supply Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that knowledge is attributed from agent to principal when agent acquires the knowledge in the course of his employment
• declining to reach issues raised in the amicus curiae brief because they were not decided by the lower courts
• declining to reach issues raised in the amicus curiae brief because they were not decided by the lower courts
• declining to address issues raised by an amicus curiae that were neither argued below nor within “the scope of the briefing order given by [the] court to the parties”
• “Because it is Bloomington Steel that seeks coverage here, the exclusion for bodily injury expected or intended by ‘the insured’ is limited to bodily injury expected or intended by Bloomington Steel itself.”
• discussing the disparity in bargaining power in the insurance context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).