Legal Opinion

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Booth

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 1932PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Swiggart

The contract of insurance, which is the test of liability in the case before us, was issued by the United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, on July 1, 1929, to continue in force one year. The insured was described in the body of the contract as “this employer, named and described in the declarations forming a part hereof.” The insurer obligated itself “to pay promptly to any person entitled thereto,” any sum due because of obligations of the employer under the Workmen’s Compensa tion Law, and also to indemnify “this employer” against loss by reason of liability for damages on account of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. Ætna Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  2. Hartigan v. . Casualty Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  3. Geitner v. United State Fidelity & Guaranty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
  4. Fidelity Union Casualty Co. v. HammockCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  5. American Mutual Liability Insurance v. PatrickTennessee Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. McKinney v. Truck Insurance ExchangeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959
  2. Brown v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1972
  3. McAdams v. CanaleTennessee Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Collins v. MurrayTennessee Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee v. CraneCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1992

10 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