Legal Opinion

Farm Bureau Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Manson

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided July 2, 1947No. 3669PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlandin, J.

In our opinion the plaintiff is obligated to defend the suit brought by the defendant Manson against the defendants Sturrock and Evans, and is not entitled to reimbursement from Sturrock and Evans for any losses incurred thereby.

All parties whose rights are in any way affected have requested the court to consider the matter of reimbursement in this proceeding. All the facts are before the court and justice and convenience seem to require that this phase of the case be disposed of at this time. No reason appears why this cannot be done. Bouchard, Declaratory Judgments (2d ed.), p. 1012. The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. O'Roak v. Lloyds Casualty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  2. Depot Cafe Inc. v. Century Indemnity Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  3. Narloch v. ChurchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Brandt v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Allstate Insurance v. HoffmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1959
  2. Irvin v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1957
  3. Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc. v. United States Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1957
  4. Kelly v. State Automobile Insurance AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1961
  5. Leytem v. Fireman's Fund Indemnity CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1957

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

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

Powered by the Exa API