Legal Opinion
Bank of Oroville v. Minnesota Fire Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 9, 1933No. Docket No. 4836PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The plaintiffs recovered judgment in a suit upon an insurance policy for the total destruction of a warehouse by fire. The appellant contends the . claim for insurance was forfeited by failure to present sworn proof of the loss until several days after the time allowed therefor by the terms of the contract. The trial court held this clause of the policy was waived by the conduct of the insurer.
The plaintiff Hayes owned a warehouse at Oroville of the approximate value of $8,000. The Bank of Oroville held a mortgage on this and other property belonging to Hayes to secure an indebtedness of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Welch v. British American Etc. Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
- White v. Home Mutual Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Francis v. Iowa National Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Estrada v. Queen Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
- McCormack v. North British InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Valley Circle Estates v. VTN Consolidated, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1983
- Highway Trailer Co. v. Donna Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1966
- H. F. Shepherdson Co. v. Central Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- Beasley v. Pacific Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Dorrance v. Pennsylvania Fire Ins.District Court, N.D. California · 1951