Harrigan v. Home Life Insurance Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinions of the court in Bank and in Department.
1Opinion
February 20, 1888, plaintiff's intestate applied through Conway, an agent of defendant in San Francisco, for a policy of life insurance upon his life for ten thousand dollars. The medical examination was had and the risk accepted. Hope gave his note, payable to the order of Dunphy, the general agent at San Francisco, for the amount of the first premium, and received from the agent a conditional receipt. Dunphy testified: "He gave his note, and it was to show that a settlement was made at the time the application was made. We call it a conditional or binding receipt."
The receipt provided that…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- New York Life Insurance v. BabcockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Palmer v. PalmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Thomas v. Pacific Beach Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Griffith v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.