Harco National Ins. Co. v. Grant Thornton LLP, February 16, 2009 (Tennille)(unpublished)

The Court permitted an insurance carrier, which had reinsured part of the loss suffered by the Plaintiff and which had made payment to the Plaintiff, and which claimed to be subrogated to the rights of the Plaintiff, to intervene in the Plaintiff's action to recover amounts it had paid paid.  The Court found that intervention was appropriate both as a matter of right, and on a permissive basis.  The intervention was permitted only for the limited purpose of the carrier being permitted to file amicus briefs.

Full Opinion

Brief in Support of Motion to Intervene

Reply Brief in Support of Motion to Intervene

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.

Remember personal info?