Legal Opinion
Hoopeston Canning Co. v. Pink
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 4, 1942PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtConway, J.
This is an action seeking a declaratory judgment that certain sections, or portions thereof, of the Insurance Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 28), as amended in 1939, relating to the regulation of foreign reciprocal insurers authorized to transact the business of insurance within New York State, are illegal and invalid in so far as they purport to affect two licensed foreign reciprocal insurers or inter-insurers. The two groups are known as the Canners Exchange Subscribers at Warner Inter-Insurance Bureau, hereinafter called Canners, and Warner Reciprocal Insurers, hereinafter called Warner.
In 1930…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Allgeyer v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey v. Albert Conway, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hoopeston Canning Co. v. CullenSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Farmers Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange v. MacDonaldWyoming Supreme Court · 1943
- Groman v. BotarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Walsh v. MazzarielloAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1947