Legal Opinion

Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. State Insurance Fund

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided September 30, 1964No. 40170PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BLACKBIRD, Chief Justice.

Plaintiff in error, whose office is in Tulsa, is the successor of General Bonding Company (whose office was in Oklahoma City) as the insurer of the defendant in error, under a public liability and property damage indemnity policy, with a maximum coverage of $20,000.00, that was in force and effect at all times material to this case. The insuring entity will hereinafter be referred to merely as the “insurer”, which, during the earlier events herein narrated was General, later succeeded by Mid-Continent.

This action is an outgrowth of earlier litigation in which the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. City of Wakefield v. Globe Indemnity Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Georgia Casualty Company v. MannCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  3. Boling v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. State Ex Rel. State Insurance Fund v. BoneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1959
  5. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co. v. MartinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Timmons v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  2. Death of Lofton v. GreenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  3. Death of Lofton v. GreenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  4. Timmons v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API