Legal Opinion
Walker v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided March 6, 1911PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Ob error to the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the Court
The opiuiou of the court was delivered by
Swayze, J.
The plaintiff was employed by the defeudaut in 1885 as au agent to solicit policies of life insurance. This *343own account of the contract, which was an oral one, is that he agreed to go to work for the company upon condition that he was allowed to retain his “debit” as long as he could collect it and as long as he was healthy and able to work. The “debit” was the amount of premiums on policies which the plaintiff was entitled to collect. His compensation was to be twenty per cent, on collections and nine times the first premium for writing the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Willcox & Gibbs Sewing MacHine Co. v. EwingSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Ætna Life Insurance v. NexsenIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Hercules Mutual Life Assurance Society of the United States v. BrinkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Phœnix Mutual Life Insurance v. HollowaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
- Stagg v. Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- American Nat. Ins. Co. v. TeagueTexas Commission of Appeals · 1922
- Wallman v. United Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
- Andrews v. Public Savings InsuranceIndiana Court of Appeals · 1923
- Morehead v. ReemMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Lewis v. Minnesota Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1949