Legal Opinion

Federal Savings & Insurance v. Rager

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 13, 1920No. 10,635PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEnloe, J.

This was an action by the administrator of Frank H. Puthoff, deceased, upon a policy of insurance issued by appellant to said Frank H. Puthoff, providing indemnity against loss of life by accident.

To a complaint in one paragraph, the appellant filed answer in two paragraphs, the first being a general denial, and the second admitting partial liability, and rely*296ing upon a clause in said policy which, was as follows, to wit: “If. the injuries, whether fatal or nonfatal * * * are caused wholly or in part from voluntary exposure to unnecessary danger or obvious risk of injury, * * * then, in all…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Travelers' Ins. Co. of Hartford v. RandolphCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
  2. Union Casualty v. HarrollTennessee Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Burkhard v. Travellers' Insurance Co. of HartfordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
  4. Commercial Travelers Mutual Accident Ass'n v. SpringsteenIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
  5. King v. ColemanTennessee Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. LinnIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Nelson County v. Williams CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Continental Casualty Co. v. WhitmoreIndiana Court of Appeals · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API