Legal Opinion
Rushing v. Commercial Casualty Insurance
New York Court of Appeals
Decided July 11, 1929PublishedCited by 140 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Cardozo, Ch. J.
In a controversy submitted to the Appellate Division upon an agreed statement of facts, the plaintiff seeks to charge the defendant with liability under Insurance Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 28), section 109.
The defendant issued to a householder its policy of insurance indemnifying against claims for damages. A condition of the policy is that “ upon the occurrence of an accident ” covered thereby, “ the assured shall give immediate notice, with the fullest information obtainable at the time, to the company or its duly authorized agent.” Plaintiff was injured on October 6, 1920, by…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Coleman v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Greenwich Bank v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. of HartfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Solomon v. . Continental Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Marx v. . BroganNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- L. Black Co. v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by140 opinions
- Security Mutual Insurance v. Acker-Fitzsimons Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Hill v. St. Clare's HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Scott Hammersmith v. Tig Insurance Company (w.d. Of Pa. Civil Nos. 02-Cv-01829 & 03-Cv-01333)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Deso v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Lauritano v. American Fidelity Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1957
135 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.