Mercantile Ins. v. Holthaus
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Ingham. Assumpsit on insurance policy. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
The defendant in error sued as assignee of Matilda Morley and Mary L. Ayers to recover a loss which they suffered under a policy of fire insurance issued by the company to them September 17, 1877. She recovered in the court below and the case comes up on exceptions. The assured were mother and daughter, and being widows they lived together in the same house. The subject of insurance was personal property consisting of household furniture, provisions, clothing apparel, and other articles, and some of it they owned in severalty. The fire occurred on the 6th of December, 1877, and preliminary…
2Cited by9 opinions
- German Insurance v. GibsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Kosior v. Continental Insurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- O'Brien v. Ohio InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Marthinson v. North British & Mercantile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Schmurr v. State InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.