Legal Opinion

Royal Ins. Co., Limited v. Martinolich

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided February 6, 1950No. 12949PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

As the appellant did, in Home Insurance Co. of New York v. Sherrill, 5 Cir., 174 F.2d 945, this appellant comes here complaining solely of the insufficiency of the evidence to support a verdict and judgment that plaintiff was entitled to a recovery under the policy.

Here, as there, appellant urges that the testimony of the plaintiff, that before any water damage took effect, the damage to the full amount insured had already been done by the wind, is not only refuted by all the other testimony, but made incredible by the undisputed facts, so that it cannot support the verdict.

Here, as there, we…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Home Ins. v. SherrillCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1949

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Continental Insurance v. KouwenhovenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  2. Firemen's Insurance Co. of Newark, NJ v. SchulteMississippi Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Donald W. Cumbest and American National Insurance Company v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
  4. Parmer v. Utah Home Fire InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1963
  5. Donald W. Cumbest and American National Insurance Company v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance Company, No. 30639 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5 Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part ICourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API