Legal Opinion

Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided September 15, 1989No. 87-482PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant, Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company (hereinafter "Pacific Mutual"), appeals from judgments, entered after a jury trial, in favor of the plaintiffs, Cleopatra Haslip, Cynthia Craig, Alma Calhoun, and Eddie Hargrove.

All four plaintiffs are employees of Roosevelt City (hereinafter the "City"), a small incorporated community in western Jefferson County. As many small communities do, Roosevelt City allowed its employees to purchase a group health insurance policy through the municipality. Originally that policy was issued by Blue Cross-Blue Shield. Some months prior to 1981,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Hammond v. City of GadsdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  3. Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. PetersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  4. INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL AND FIBERGLASS CORP. v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1989
  5. National States Ins. Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. HaslipSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Andrew Jackson Life Ins. Co. v. WilliamsMississippi Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Seltzer v. MortonMontana Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Fibreboard Corp. v. PoolCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1991
  5. Henderson by Hartsfield v. Alabama PowerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993

63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API