Legal Opinion

Neal v. United States Fire Insurance Company

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 18, 1968No. 370PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SHARPE, Justice.

The sole point of error asserted by appellants is that the trial court erred in overruling their motion for judgment non obstante veredicto. Appellee’s reply point contends that the complained-of action was correct because the evidence raised an issue of fact as to the controlling issue in the case.

This suit was brought by appellant Neal against United States Fire Insurance Company, hereafter USFICO, and Joe Co-macho for declaratory judgment determining the liability of said insurance company under a policy of automobile liability insurance issued to Santos Comacho, the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rodenkirk ex rel. Deitenbach v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1945
  2. Aler v. Travelers Indemnity Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1950
  3. Lumbermens Mut. Casualty Co. v. PulsiferDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1941
  4. George B. Wallace Co. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  5. TIME, INC. v. Maryland Casualty CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Boedigheimer v. TaylorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
  2. McCel Benjamin v. Plains Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  3. Kunze v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1972
  4. International Service Insurance Co. v. WaltherCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1971
  5. Childress v. Dairyland County Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1982

7 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