Legal Opinion

Pearson v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 25, 1943No. 33,468PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Henry M. Gallagher, Chief Justice.

Two actions, one by Ruth Pearson for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident and the other by her husband, E. L. Pearson, for medical expenses incurred on her behalf, were tried together below. Both resulted in verdicts for plaintiffs, and judgment was entered pursuant thereto in each case. Garnishment proceedings were then instituted by plaintiffs against Western Casualty & Surety Company (hereinafter called Western) and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (hereinafter called State Farm Mutual), both of which disclaimed any…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Birrenkott v. Mc ManamaySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Continental Casualty Co. v. PierceMississippi Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Bernard v. Wisconsin Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Madison v. StellerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Ass'n v. Aetna Casualty & Surety InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  2. American Fidelity & Casualty Company, Inc. v. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
  3. Cimarron Insurance v. Travelers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Maryland Casualty Co. v. New Jersey Manufacturers (Casualty) InsuranceNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
  5. Great American Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963

36 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