Legal Opinion

Franklin Life Insurance Company v. Rogers

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 30, 1958No. 3387PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRISSOM, Chief Justice.

Rogers was the agent of Franklin Life Insurance Company for the purpose of soliciting applications for insurance. They had a written contract which provided for payment of commissions to Rogers. Section 23 provided that if Franklin should be sued because of an “alleged” act of Rogers all expense of such a suit should be paid by Rogers. Rogers sold policies to John M. Faggard. Faggard sued Rogers and Franklin Insurance Company to cancel the policies and recover the premiums paid because of an alleged misrepresentation by Rogers. A jury found that Rogers had represented…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Gulbenkian v. PennTexas Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Charles E. Harding Co. v. HardingIllinois Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Davis v. First National Bank of WacoTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Houston Terminal Land Co. v. WestergreenTexas Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Life Insurance Co. of Virginia v. Gar-Dal, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Smith v. Crockett Production Credit Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963
  3. Bein v. McPhaulCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962
  4. Sawyer v. GetzCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1965
  5. Dingman v. Commercial Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API