O'Neill v. Northern Assurance Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to St. Clair; Tappan, J. Assumpsit by John G. O’Neill and others against the Northern Assurance Company of London, England, on a policy of insurance. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
1. This case is before us for the second time. 145 Mich. 516. A sufficient statement of the case and of the evidence is there made. Upon the first trial the court directed a verdict for the-plaintiffs. Upon the new trial the questions of the cancellation of the policy and the authority of Byron J. McCormick to act for the plaintiffs in the matter were submitted to the jury. We held upon the former hearing that, if the jury should find that Miss Ferrier, who represented the insurance brokers who issued and attempted to cancel the policy, obtained the policy, as she testified, then the jury…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. Northern Assurance Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1905
- Clawson v. Citizens' Mutual Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Hare v. Workingmen's Mutual Protective Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Sibley v. Prescott InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Quackenbush v. Citizens' Insurance Co. of MissouriMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Neary v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1910
- Lawrence v. Will Darrah & Associates, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Gilchrist v. Mystic Workers of the WorldMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Leisen v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
- Perkins v. Century Insurance v. British General InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.