Legal Opinion

White v. Home Mutual Insurance Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1900No. S.F. No. 1392PublishedCited by 17 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

This appeal involves a contract of fire insurance, and the first question to be considered arises upon the •sufficiency of the complaint. It appears thereby that the fire 'occurred June 8, 1896, and that proof of loss was made October 19th thereafter. The contract of insurance was attached to the •complaint as an exhibit, and in that exhibit we find the following provisions: “And within sixty days after the fire, unless such time is extended in writing by this company, shall render a statement to this company signed and sworn to,” etc. And ■again: “No suit or action on this policy for the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Steele v. German InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Kenton Insurance v. DownsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1890
  3. Gould v. Dwelling-House InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Owen v. Farmers' Joint Stock InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Morey v. PaladiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Watson v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Arizona Supreme Court · 1925
  3. In Re WiegandDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1939
  4. Estrada v. Queen Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Kohner v. National Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930

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

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

Powered by the Exa API