Montgomery v. Ætna Life Ins.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Michigan. This is an action in assumpsit upon a bond executed by William B. Montgomery, as principal, and M. V. and It. A. Montgomery, as bis sureties, to the AStna Life Insurance Company. March 16, 1896, W. B. Montgomery was appointed the general agent for the ¿Etna Life Insurance Company for the territory included in the lower peninsula of the state of Michigan.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Michigan. This is an action in assumpsit upon a bond executed by William B. Montgomery, as principal, and M. V. and It. A. Montgomery, as bis sureties, to the AStna Life Insurance Company. March 16, 1896, W. B. Montgomery was appointed the general agent for the ¿Etna Life Insurance Company for the territory included in the lower peninsula of the state of Michigan. The terms of the agency were prescribed by a written contract, duly signed and delivered, as follows: “This agreement, made in the city of Hartford,…
1Opinion of the CourtLurton, Circuit Judge
1. The first four assignments of error relate exclusively to the ruling of the court in respect to the limits of a cross-examination. A witness introduced and examined by the plaintiff to prove the mere formal parts of the plaintiff’s case was cross-examined in respect to the subject-matter of the defendant’s set-off, touching which he had not been examined in chief. Upon objection by the plaintiff, the court ruled that the cross-examination should be confined to matters covered by the examination in chief, and sustained an objection to a number of questions which related only to the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- De Witt v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Wiggins v. BurkhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Oil Co. v. Van EttenSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Wills v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Resurrection Gold Min. Co. v. Fortune Gold Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Harrold v. Territory of OklahomaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
- McKnight v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
- Balliet v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Caflisch v. HumbleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1918
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.