Legal Opinion

Gem State Mutual Life Insurance Ass'n v. O'CONNELL

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1957No. 8543PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, Justice.

Plaintiff (appellant) is a mutual benefit life insurance association organized under the laws of this state and doing business as authorized and limited by the provisions of Title 41, Chap-. 31, I.C. Plaintiff submitted to the defendant (respondent) state commissioner of insurance, for his approval, a form of policy bearing three supplements which it proposed to issue. Approval of the commissioner is required by statute. § 41-3117, subd. 5, I.C. The com*430missioner disapproved all three proposed supplements. Plaintiff appealed to the district court. That court affirmed the order…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Carpenter v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. California State Automobile Ass'n Inter-Insurance Bureau v. MaloneySupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. O'Connor v. City of MoscowIdaho Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Continental Oil Co. v. City of Twin FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Rowe v. City of PocatelloIdaho Supreme Court · 1950

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Messerli v. Monarch Memory Gardens, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Gem State Mutual Life Ass'n v. O'ConnellIdaho Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Gem State Mutual Life Insurance Ass'n v. O'CONNELLIdaho Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Messerli v. Monarch Memory Gardens, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API