Legal Opinion

Pharr v. Diegel

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 15, 1968No. 7772PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHAPMAN, Justice.

The specific question here presented is whether a duly licensed life, health and accident insurance agent, with a certificate of authority to act as agent or solicitor for Springfield Life Insurance Company is precluded as a matter of law from a court enforced collection of premiums from a general agent for the same and two other insurance companies on business solicited with Pan American Insurance Company (one of such other companies) from whom he had never obtained a brokerage contract and appointment as agent, and which was brokeraged through the general agent, the Diegel…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pioneer Mutual Compensation Corp. v. DiazTexas Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Morrison v. City of Fort WorthTexas Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Van Perkins v. LambertCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
  4. Royal Ins. Co. v. OkasakiCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  5. Tidelands Life Insurance Company v. ArmstrongCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1967

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Pharr v. DiegelTexas Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Quincy Demond Blakely v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2018

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

Powered by the Exa API