Legal Opinion

Mullen v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 28, 1934PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPierce, J.

This is a suit in equity to enforce the payment of a judgment recovered by the plaintiff against one Sidney Sacks, who was insured under a policy issued by the defendant company. The policy was issued in accordance with § 34A, inserted in c. 90 of the General Laws by St. 1925, c. 346, § 2, and provided, as appears by a copy in the record, indemnity to the insured “against loss by reason of the liability to pay damages to others for bodily injuries . . . sustained during the term of this policy by any person . . . [with exceptions not here material] arising out of the ownership, operation,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Caron v. American Motorists Insurance Co. of ChicagoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Schmidt v. Utilities Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1944
  2. Ruggerio Ambulance Service, Inc. v. National Grange Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  3. Pacific Automobile Ins. v. Commercial Casualty Ins. Co. of New YorkUtah Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Morris v. American Liability & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Truck Insurance Exchange v. WebbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967

22 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