Legal Opinion
Cupo v. Royal Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 12, 1924PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
Upon the trial of this action to a jury, it ivas admitted by the pleadings that Field and Cowles (of Boston, Massachusetts) were the New England managers of the defendant, and John A. Gammons, an authorized resident agent at Providence, Rhode Island, and that they issued a policy of insurance to the plaintiffs against the theft of their Ford car. There was no controversy that the jury properly found that the plaintiffs owned the car and that on January 15th, 1922, while the policy was in force, the car was stolen from the plaintiffs.
In their complaint the plaintiffs alleged: “That on the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bernhard v. Rochester German InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- Plumb v. CurtisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Wilmot v. McPaddenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- General Hospital Society v. New Haven Rendering Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- Fish, Receiver v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Turner v. ScanlonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Ezzo v. GeremiahSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Middletown Trust Co. v. BregmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Wolfe v. Wallingford Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Lemmon v. Paterson Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.