Legal Opinion

Telesky v. Fidelity Guaranty Fire Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 5, 1940No. Appeal, 20PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, J.,

This is an action of assumpsit on a policy issued to plaintiff by defendant insuring her against loss of use and occupancy of premises occupied by her, due to fire. After a verdict for plaintiff, the court below refused defendant’s motion for judgment n. o v., and judgment was entered for plaintiff. Defendant has appealed, assigning as error said judgment, the refusal of its point for binding instructions, and its motion for judgment n. o. v.

Appellant contends that the court below erred for two reasons: (1) Because no proof of loss was furnished by appellee to appellant;…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Fire Insurance v. DoughertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
  2. Gratz v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Caldwell v. Fire Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  4. Kocher v. KocherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Hoffman v. Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of ReadingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Selden v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  2. Pusti v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  3. Gordon v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Selden v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API