Legal Opinion

New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Rust

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 1932PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKinney

This is a suit on two accident insurance policies, similar in their provisions, tried before the court without the intervention of a jury. The court found for the original plaintiff and entered judgment for the face value of both policies, together with a 25 per cent penalty. The insurance company has appealed. The case was tried upon the following stipulation of facts:

“1. That the two policies mentioned in the declarations were issued to the deceased, Horace Cornelius, on or about May 25, 1929, for a consideration of $0.50 per year paid as premium.
“2. That each of said policies provided…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Travellers' Insurance v. McConkeySupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Bigelow v. Berkshire Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  3. Morris v. PeytonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1927
  4. Ætna Life Ins. v. VandecarCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
  5. Insurance Co. v. SeaverSupreme Court of the United States · 1874

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Phil G. Ruvelson, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  2. Green v. National Bellas Hess Life Insurance Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Life Casualty Ins. Co. of Tennessee v. De ArmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1936
  4. Goldman v. Commercial Travellers Eastern Accident Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  5. McDonald v. Life & Casualty Ins. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1935

7 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