Roosth v. American General Life Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
CHADICK, Chief Justice.
These suits are by the beneficiaries of two insurance policies to enforce collection of the policies and recover penalty and attorney’s fees. The judgments of the trial court denied a recovery against the insurance company and such judgments are affirmed.
Two separate insurance policies are involved and separate suits were filed in the trial court, by consent they were tried together pursuant to Rule 174, Vernon’s Ann.Texas Rules, and the appeal reaches this court from separate judgments, but here, as in the trial court, both cases are consolidated for disposition. The…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Coxson v. Atlanta Life InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1944
- Clark v. National Life & Accident InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1947
- American Central Life Ins. Co. v. AlexanderTexas Commission of Appeals · 1933
- Vann v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1930
- Great Southern Life Ins. Co. v. DoyleTexas Commission of Appeals · 1941
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bell v. Sharif-Munir-Davidson Development Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1987
- American National Insurance Company v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963