St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. American Compounding Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
The suit is on an automobile insurance policy. The actionable loss is claimed under the collision clause of the policy.
In substance, the policy insured "against direct loss or damage" "by being in accidental collision during the period insured with any other automobile, vehicle, or object." It excluded injury received while engaged in a race or speed contest, or while operated by one under sixteen years of age.
The evidence for plaintiff tended to show that the car, a Winton Six, was standing in front of plaintiff's office on the crest of a hill; the rear wheels were on level ground, and the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- London Assurance v. Companhia De Moagens Do BarreiroSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Bell v. American Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1921
- Harris v. American Casualty Co. of ReadingSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1912
- Universal Service Co. v. American InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Continental Casualty Co. v. PaulSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Moffet v. Kansas City Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1952
- Davilla v. Liberty Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Fogarty v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Trans-Continental Mutual Insurance Co. v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Boenzle v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1953
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.