Gem State Mutual Life Insurance Ass'n v. O'CONNELL
Idaho Supreme Court
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
- Carpenter v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- California State Automobile Ass'n Inter-Insurance Bureau v. MaloneySupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- O'Connor v. City of MoscowIdaho Supreme Court · 1949
- Continental Oil Co. v. City of Twin FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1930
- Rowe v. City of PocatelloIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Messerli v. Monarch Memory Gardens, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1964
- Gem State Mutual Life Ass'n v. O'ConnellIdaho Supreme Court · 1958
- Gem State Mutual Life Insurance Ass'n v. O'CONNELLIdaho Supreme Court · 1957
- Messerli v. Monarch Memory Gardens, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1964