Stewart v. Helvetia Swiss Fire Ins. Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Byrnes, the local agent of defendant at Visalia, had no actual or ostensible authority to enter into a binding contract upon the part of defendant for the renewal of the policy held by plaintiff, and the proposal of plaintiff made to such agent for a renewal of said policy was, until communicated to and accepted by defendant, nothing more than a mere offer upon the *220part of plaintiff to renew such policy. The fact that the agent promised to communicate the offer to defendant, and did not do so until after the loss, while it might make the agent liable to plaintiff for the damage…
2Cited by6 opinions
- McCabe Bros. v. Aetna InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1899
- Lucas v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Carter v. Manhattan Life InsuranceHawaii Supreme Court · 1897
- O'Brien v. New Zealand InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Engleman v. General Accident, Fire & Life Assurance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.