Legal Opinion

Rosen v. Royal Indemnity Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided April 6, 1927PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSanderson, J.

This is an action of contract to recover damages under a policy insuring against burglary, theft and larceny, for the alleged loss by theft of a diamond ring, the property of the plaintiff’s wife. The judge who presided at the trial allowed a motion of the defendant for a directed verdict with a stipulation that, if the case should have been submitted to the jury, judgment is to be entered for the plaintiff in a stated sum; otherwise judgment is to be entered on the verdict.

The policy covers jewelry and other articles, designated in a schedule annexed, “belonging to the Insured or any…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Murray v. Continental InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Rich v. United Mutual Fire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
  3. Meagher v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1994
  4. Metivier v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1999
  5. Petitt v. MortonOhio Court of Appeals · 1928

2 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