Adler-Weinberger S. S. Co. v. Rothschild & Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
At Law. _ On motions by defendants for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
1Opinion of the Court
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
This action is based upon section 48 of the Pennsylvania statute of May I, 1876 (P. L. S3, 66) which is as follows:
“The agent of any insurance company of any other state or government, which does not comply with the laws of this commonwealth, shall be personally liable on all contracts of insurance made by or through him, directly or indirectly, for or in behalf of any such company.”
The undisputed facts are—I take them substantially from the brief of defendants’ counsel—that the plaintiff, a citizen of Louisiana, in March, 1900, obtained the three marine…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Allgeyer v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Hooper v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- People's Building, Loan & Saving Ass'n v. BerlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Noble v. MitchellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Commonwealth v. BiddleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Buell v. Kanawha Lumber Corp.District Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1912
- Reliance Lumber Co. v. RothschildDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1904