Legal Opinion

Smith v. Royal Ins.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided February 3, 1939No. 19382-RPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ROCHE, District Judge.

This is an action on a leasehold fire insurance policy. It has been before this court on two previous occasions and has been the subject of two opinions by the Circuit Court of Appeals. 9 Cir., 77 F.2d 157; 9 Cir., 93 F.2d 143. In 1933 the late Judge Kerrigan rendered a decision in favor of plaintiff. D.C., 5 F.Supp. 435. This ruling was reversed and remanded because the pleadings and the proof failed to establish an insurable leasehold. Since that time, plaintiff has amended his complaint sufficiently to show an interest which would support v. judgment in his favor. The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Smith v. Royal Ins.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
  2. Royal Ins. Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
  3. Smith v. Royal Ins.District Court, N.D. California · 1933

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Smith v. Royal Ins.District Court, N.D. California · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API