Legal Opinion

Oroville Cordell Fruit Growers, Inc. v. Minneapolis Fire & Marine Insurance

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 3, 1966No. 37781PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

Ammonia gas escaped from.aluminum tubing in a cold storage room (hereinafter referred to as Room 2) in a warehouse operated by the plaintiff, Oroville Cordell Fruit Growers, Incorporated (hereinafter called Oroville). This caused damage to the 16,608 boxes of apples then in Room 2. There is no question about Oroville being completely compensated for its loss. The controversy is over how that loss is to be apportioned between three insurance companies. Pacific Indemnity Insurance Company (hereinafter called Pacific), which had insured Oroville against loss or damage arising out of any…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Lever Bros. Co. v. Atlas Assur. Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
  2. Prentice Packing & Storage Co. v. United Pacific InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Allen v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Jersey Insurance Company of New York v. Charles J. Heffron, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
  5. Commercial Union Fire Ins. Co. Of New York v. Bank of GeorgiaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Graham v. Public Employees Mutual InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Schmieder v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1977
  3. St. Mary's Area Water Authority v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Graham v. Public Employees Mutual InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Oroville Cordell Fruit Growers, Inc. v. Minneapolis Fire & Marine InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API