Legal Opinion

Illinois Bankers' Life Ass'n v. Mann

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 23, 1923PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, J.,

(after stating the facts). Is the appellant company liable in any event for the statutory penalty and-attorney’s fee? The showing is made that appellant company is a mutual company and does business as such, but it was not shown to be a fraternal company.

In the recent case of Indiana Lumbermen’s Mutual Ins. Co. v. Meyers Stave & Mfg. Co., ante p. 199, we said: “It will be observed that the penalty statute applies in the broadest terms to suits to recover for losses by ‘fire, life, health, or accident insurance,’ but in the Anderson case, supra, we held that fraternal benefit…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United Assurance Ass'n v. FrederickSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
  2. Knights of Maccabees v. AndersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
  3. Simmons v. American Railway Express Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1921

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. National Fire Insurance v. KightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
  2. Springfield Mutual Association v. AtnipSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
  3. National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. BynumSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  4. Continental Casualty Co. v. VardamanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
  5. Mississippi Life Insurance v. MeadowsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923

1 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