Legal Opinion
Mutual Reserve Life Insurance v. Birch
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided December 18, 1905No. 344PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In error to the Supreme Court of the State o'f New York.
2Per curiam
Judgment affirmed with ten per cent damages, in addition to interest-and costs. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association v. Phelps, 190 U. S. 147; Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Spratley, 172 U. S. 602; Egan v. Hart, 165 U. S. 188; Richardson v. L. & N. Railroad Company, 169 U. S. 128; Young v. Valentine, 177 N. Y. 347; Woodward v. Mutual Reserve Life Insurance Company, 178 N. Y. 485; Birch v. Mutual Reserve Life Insurance Company, 181 N. Y. 583; S. C., 91 App. Div. 384.
3Cases cited8 opinions
- Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. SpratleySupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Mutual Reserve Fund Life Assn. v. PhelpsSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Egan v. HartSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Young v. . ValentineNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Woodward v. . Mutual Reserve Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1904
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by11 opinions
- Hunter v. Mutual Reserve Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Gaboury v. Central Vermont Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Consolidated Flour Mills Co. v. MueggeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
- Frazier v. Steel & Tube Co. of AmericaWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- City of Gretna v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1944
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.