Legal Opinion

Paulauskas v. Fireman's Fund Insurance

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 24, 1925PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarroll, J.

The defendant issued to The Henley Kim-ball Company and Stanislous Paulauskas “as their interest may appear” a policy of insurance against loss by fire of the plaintiff’s automobile. There was evidence that the automobile was purchased by the plaintiff from The Henley Kim-ball Company on a contract of conditional sale, and that it was destroyed by fire. The defendant relies on the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the conditions of the policy as to' notice and proof of loss, and on his breach of certain warranties contained in the policy. The defendant’s motion for a directed verdict was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kyte v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  2. Cass v. LordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  3. Eastern Advertising Co. v. E. L. Patch Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  4. Larner v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  5. Porter v. United States Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kosior v. Continental Insurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  2. Span v. Jackson-Walker Coal & Mining Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1929
  3. Friedman v. Orient InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Shapiro v. Security InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
  5. Milton Ice Co. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947

8 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