Legal Opinion
Cunningham v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided November 27, 1933No. 6960PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge.
Appellant, claiming for her ward “automatic insurance” benefits extended by section 401, Act of October 6, 1917 (40 Stat. 409), 1 brought this suit to compel their payment. The United States resisted the'suit as wanting in jurisdictional basis, and also as without basis in fact. The point was made that claims for automatic insurance were no-t in their nature suable because founded not on contract but on bounty, and no provision had been made for suit on them. It was further contended that if the claim be considered one under a contract of insurance and suable under…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Falbo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- Wise v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1933
- United States v. HillCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- United States v. AlbertyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
- United States v. HowardCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Boggan v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. of ChattanoogaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1935
- Galloway v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- Mrs. Nancy Ellen Gilbert Acker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- United States v. SandiferCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1935
- Lamar Bowers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.