Cirlin v. Fidelity & Casualty Insurance Co.
City of New York Municipal Court
1Opinion of the CourtJoseph A. Bogota, J.
Plaintiff instituted this action to recover the sum of $11.36 claimed to be due him for brokerage commissions. Demand for payment was made of the defendant and refused. The defendant in its answer pleads a general denial and, affirmatively, “foreign law.” The action proceeded to trial before this court and at the trial the following facts were either adduced or conceded, so that the only proposition to be determined by this court is one of law. Briefly stated, the facts indicate that the plaintiff, who was a licensed insurance broker under the laws of the State of New York, was the “ producer…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hoopeston Canning Co. v. CullenSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Osborn v. OzlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Daniel v. Family Security Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Aetna Life Insurance v. DunkenSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Compañia General De Tabacos De Filipinas v. Collector of Internal RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Andrew J. Corsa & Son, Inc. v. HarnettNew York Supreme Court · 1977
- Down v. New York Automobile Insurance PlanCivil Court of the City of New York · 1978