Tacoma Lumber & Shingle Co. v. Fireman's Fund Insurance
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Snohomish county, Bell, J., entered July 7, 1914, upon findings in favor of the plaintiffs, in an action on a fire insurance policy, tried to the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMorris, C. J.
Appeal from a judgment sustaining a recovery upon a fire insurance policy. The facts are about these: On May 19, 1912, Calhoun, Denny & Ewing, agents at Seattle for several fire insurance companies, including the *80Royal Insurance Company and appellant, wrote a policy in the Royal Insurance Company covering the property of respondent, and delivered the same to it. About the last of August a special agent of the Royal Insurance Company instructed Calhoun, Denny & Ewing to cancel this policy. Mr. Arnold, manager of the insurance department of Calhoun, Denny & Ewing, sought to inform respondent by…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hermann v. Niagara Fire InsururanceNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. State ex rel. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- John R. Davis Lumber Co. v. Hartford Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
- Clark v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1896
- Waterloo Lumber Co. v. Des Moines InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bache v. Great Lakes Insurance Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1929
- Pelaggi Co. v. Orient Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1930
- Violette v. Insurance Co. of PennsylvaniaWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- Wells Petroleum Co. v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1954
- Snavely v. London Assurance Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.