Legal Opinion

Potestio v. Continental Casualty Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1935No. 25482. Department OnePublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMillard, C. J.

Peter Malito and Charles Potestio disliked each other. That mutual aversion culminated September 10, 1932, in tbe instant death of Malito as the result of a bullet wound inflicted by Potestio.

Under the terms of an insurance policy issued June 5, 1932, by the Continental Casualty Company to Ma-lito, the insurer was obligated to indemnify the insured, or his beneficiaries, for loss of life, limb, limbs, sight or time caused by accidental injury, and for the loss of time caused by sickness. One of the provisions of the insurance contract excluded indemnity for any loss,

“if the injury causing it…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. American Accident Co. v. CarsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1896
  2. Interstate Business Men's Accident Ass'n v. DunnCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
  3. Continental Casualty Co. v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1907
  4. Continental Casualty Co. v. KlingeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1924
  5. Business Men's Indemnity Assn. v. WashburnIndiana Court of Appeals · 1927

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ziolkowski v. Continental Casualty Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Ziolkowski v. Continental Casualty Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API