Legal Opinion
Boston Ins. v. Hudson
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 5, 1926No. 4710PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.
This was an action on a California standard form fire in surance policy, containing the familiar pro visions that the policy shall be void if the interest of the insured be other than unconditional and sole ownership, or if the subject of insurance be a building on ground not owned by the insured in fee simple, and that no officer, agent, or other representative of the company shall have power to waive any of the provisions or conditions of the policy, *962except by writing indorsed thereon or added thereto. No testimony was offered by the defendant below, and there is no…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Northern Assurance Co. v. Grand View Building Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Imperial Fire Insurance v. Coos CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Lumber Underwriters of NY v. RifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Kentucky Vermillion Mining & Concentrating Co. v. Norwich Union Fire Ins. Soc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1906
- Rife v. Lumber UnderwritersCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Norwich Union Indemnity Co. v. H. Kobacker & Sons Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1929
- Fidelity Union Fire Ins. Co. of Dallas v. KelleherCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1926
- Hutchings v. Caledonian Ins. Co. of ScotlandCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1929
- Lawson v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1932
- Alexander v. General Ins. Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.