Legal Opinion
Lauman v. Concordia Fire Insurance Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 24, 1920No. Civ. No. 3208PublishedCited by 4 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The facts upon which this appeal is based are stated in our former opinion herein. The conclusions there reached as to items one and three of’ the policy in question are not questioned on this rehearing. We therefore adopt that opinion in part as follows:
“This is an action to recover on a fire insurance policy. Plaintiff Lauman was at all times referred to in this action engaged in the cleaning and dyeing business in the city of Los Angeles. His ‘customers’ were the owners of ‘routes,’ having their own wagons, etc., with which they solicited the patronage of their own patrons throughout…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Farnum v. Phoenix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. KramerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Ferrar v. Western Assurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1916
- Cronenwett v. Iowa Underwriters of the Dubuque Fire & Marine InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Victoria Park Co. v. Continental InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
3Cited by4 opinions
- General Ins. Co. of America v. Pathfinder Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
- McDonald v. North River InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 1923
- Financial Indemnity Co. v. MurphyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- General Ins. Co. of America v. Pathfinder Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944