Legal Opinion

Morgan Smith Automotive Products, Inc. v. Continental Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 25, 1965No. Appeal, No. 179PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell,

The Court of Common Pleas sustained preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and entered an Order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint in assumpsit.

The complaint alleged that defendant had issued to plaintiff-appellant a policy of insurance against loss by fire of certain auto heaters. The lower Court held that the insurance policy was unambiguous and by its terms covered only fire losses which were sustained in a fireproof building at 216 Mill Street, Rockford, Illinois. Defendant’s demurrer was sustained because the complaint alleged that the auto…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Grandin v. Rochester German InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
  2. Levinton v. Ohio Farmers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  3. Davison v. London & Lancashire Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
  4. McClure v. Mutual Fire Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  5. Haws v. St. Paul F. & M. Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Treasure Craft Jewelers, Inc. v. Jefferson Insurance Company of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
  2. Pfeiffer v. Grocers Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Curran Hydraulic Corp. v. National-Ben Franklin Insurance Co. of IllinoisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1978
  4. Treasure Craft Jewelers, Inc. v. Jefferson InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Pruser v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

2 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