Legal Opinion

Cue v. Connecticut Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 8, 1913No. 18,001PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Cowley district court.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Porter, J.:

Action on a fire insurance policy. Plaintiff recovered and the defendant appeals.

A solicitor in the employ of the local agents of the insurance company took the written application for *91the policy, and the appellee’s evidence tended to show that the solicitor inspected the property and had knowledge of the fact that gasoline was used on the premises, and that the building had no chimney or flue for a .stove; further, that the solicitor told the assured that it would be all right to use gasoline. The agents issued the policy, after approving…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Pfiester v. Missouri State Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  2. Continental Insurance v. RuckmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  3. German Insurance v. GraySupreme Court of Kansas · 1890
  4. Standard Life & Accident Insurance v. DavisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1898
  5. Gurnett v. Atlas Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pettijohn v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  2. Nichols v. Commonwealth Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1923
  3. Stewart v. Commonwealth Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1933
  4. McPherson Mercantile Co. v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  5. Svetlicic v. Farmers Alliance InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1932

2 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