Legal Opinion

Sardo v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided October 18, 1926PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Kays, J.

The bill in this case was filed by the complainant-respondent for the purpose of having a policy of insurance reformed which had been issued by the defendant, the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, to Thomas Sardo, the complainant-respondent. It appears from the proofs in this case that Thomas Sardo, the complainant, desired to obtain insurance against theft on his stock of jewelry in.a store in the city of Paterson, New Jersey, which business was there conducted by him. Sardo applied for such insurance to one Lederer, who took him to a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Crescent Ring Co. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1926

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
  2. Volker v. the Conn. Fire Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
  3. Millhurst Milling & Drying Co. v. Automobile Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
  4. Portella v. SonnenbergNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
  5. Heake v. Atlantic Casualty Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954

4 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