Legal Opinion
Hartford Acc. Etc. Co. v. Indus. Acc. Com.
California Supreme Court
Decided July 20, 1932No. Docket No. S.F. 14572PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] The Pickering Lumber Company, at all the times herein mentioned, was a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, and duly authorized to transact business in this state, and during the same time the petitioner herein, the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, was a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Connecticut, duly authorized to become sole surety on bonds and undertakings in this state. On the fourteenth day of May,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- General Acc. Etc. Corp. v. Indus. Acc. Com.California Supreme Court · 1925
- Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Farrar v. Christy's AdministratorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1857
- State ex rel. Moore v. SanduskySupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Showles v. FreemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Colorado Structures, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of the WestWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- T&R Painting Construction Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Harris v. Northwestern National InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Colonial American Casualty & Surety Co. v. Scherer, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2007
- Lawrence Tractor Co. v. Carlisle Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.