Legal Opinion

Puckhaber v. Henry

California Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1907No. S.F. No. 4240PublishedCited by 32 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting defendant’s motion for a new trial. The action was originally one against the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, a corporation, to recover the amount due on a policy of insurance issued by that company to John P. Henry, upon the life of said Henry, the plaintiff alleging that said policy had been assigned to him by Henry on August 22, 1896. Henry died on January 9, 1902, and the action was commenced May 8, 1902. The insurance company admitting the validity of the policy and alleging that both plaintiff and Kate Henry, administratrix of estate…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Lord v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Spect v. SpectCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Booth v. HoskinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Grant v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Burns v. HiattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Faxon v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Mitchell v. Automobile Owners Indemnity UnderwritersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Riter v. DouglassNevada Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Bridge v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Flack v. BolandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

27 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