Legal Opinion
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Dempster
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 13, 1959No. Civ. 18270PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.
An injunction against former agents of an insurance company which prohibited solicitation of policyholders by these agents and use of information obtained in the course of their former relationship does not fail because of ambiguity in the contract of appointment or because of adverse equitable considerations or statutory prohibition. The injunction properly required that the agents return certain unused material to the company. The court correctly awarded to the agents “termination benefits” which represented compensation for past services.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
- Continental Car-Na-Var Corp. v. MoseleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Gordon v. LandauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Partridge v. The Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Chamberlain v. AugustineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Neal v. State Farm Insurance CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Hollingsworth Solderless Terminal Co., a Corporation v. William Turley, an Individual and Hoffman Electronics Corporation, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Hayes-Albion Corp. v. KuberskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
- Woodward Insurance, Inc. v. WhiteIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
- Robert E. Hedberg v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1965
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.