Legal Opinion
Casey v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of America
New York County Courts
Decided December 10, 1956PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMartin Schenck, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Albany (Herzog, J.) dismissing the complaint herein. The issue arises concerning the interpretation of the following clause in a theft insurance policy: “ Theft. The word ‘ theft ’ includes larceny, burglary and robbery. Mysterious disappearance of any insured property except a precious or semi-precious stone from its setting in any watch or piece of jewelry, shall be presumed to be due to theft.”
The plaintiff was visiting a doctor for treatment in connection with a dislocated disc in his back. In the foyer of the doctor’s office he…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Davis v. St. Paul Mercury & Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Caldwell v. St. Paul Mercury-Indemnity Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1950
- Loop v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1953
- Levine v. Accident & Casualty InsuranceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1952
- Sigel v. American Guarantee & Liability InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hammontree v. Central Mutual Insurance CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1965
- Aetna Insurance Company v. ZoblotskySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1971
- Austin v. American Casualty CompanyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1963
- Casey v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1957
- Brier v. Mutual Insurance Co. of HartfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.