Case v. Manufacturers' Fire & Marine Insurance
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.
The order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial in this case was reversed by a decision of Department One, on the sole ground that the finding as to the amount of respondent’s loss was contrary to the evidence. A rehearing having been granted, we are satisfied, after reargument and re-examination of the record, that we misconstrued the testimony of the witness Pam, and were led to an erroneous conclusion as to the effect of it by failing to add to the invoice price of the goods purchased the whole amount of the freight,— $993. This was necessary in order to obtain a proper basis for the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Williams v. Hartford Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1880
- Old Saucelito Land & Dry Dock Co. v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1884
- Adams v. South British & National Fire & Marine Insurance Companies of New ZealandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by8 opinions
- Greiss v. State Investment & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Jordan v. FriedmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- J. M. Winchester v. North British & Mercantile InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Commercial Union Assur. Co. v. PrestonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Depaola v. Nat. Ins. Co., Humboldt Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.