Quia Timet Claims

By: Derek Hawkins//July 1, 2019//

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland v. Edward E. Gillen Company

Case No.: 18-2144; 18-3446

Officials: EASTERBROOK, SYKES, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Quia Timet Claims

Although linguists call Latin a “dead language,” legal nomenclature dies hard. This case presents a surety’s claim for quia timet—equitable protection from probable future harm. The surety (an insurance company) is suing its principal (a construction company) that allegedly went belly up on a government project. The ancient equitable doctrine of quia timet remains viable into the 21st century, but the surety’s claim in this case is a dead letter. We affirm summary judgment for Gillen on the merits and dismiss Fidelity’s challenge to the costs taxed by the clerk of court.

Affirmed in part. Dismissed in part.

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event