Legal Opinion
Meinsen v. Order of United Commercial Travelers
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided January 15, 1942No. 895PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COLLET, District Judge.
Upon motion for new trial plaintiff assails the correctness of the conclusion heretofore reached upon two grounds. First, it is insisted that the opinion of the Kansas City Court of Appeals in Crohn v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America, 170 Mo.App. 273, 156 S.W. 472, compels the •conclusion that the contract herein involved is a Missouri contract and controlled by the Laws of Missouri, and, Second, that -even should the contract be an Ohio contract the clause limiting the time for the bringing of this action is contrary to the -established public policy of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Loucks v. . Standard Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Fauntleroy v. LumSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Home Insurance v. DickSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Griffin v. McCoachSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Supreme Council of the Royal Arcanum v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Company, a Corporation v. Norris Grain Company, a Tennessee Corporation, and Norris Grain Company, an Illinois CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1965
- State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. SmithDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1942
- Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. Aetna InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1971
- Langan v. Roberts Bros.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1943