Legal Opinion

Decker v. Kolleda

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 17, 1937PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By THE COURT

Under the terms of the automobile liability insurance policy in controversy in this action the condition of the policy that “upon the occurrence of any loss or accident covered under this section, the assured shall give written notice to the company at its home office at Columbus, Ohio, or its duly authorized agent, as soon as is reasonably possible with the fullest information obtainable at the time” is, by the further condition appearing in the policy that “no suit or action on this policy, for the recovery of any claim on account of loss or damage to the automobile…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State Automobile Mutual Insurance v. LindOhio Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CassinelliNevada Supreme Court · 1950
  2. MFA Mutual Insurance Company v. MullinDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1957
  3. Northwestern Mutual Insurance Co. v. Independence Mutual Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API