Legal Opinion

Meader v. Farmers' Mutual Fire Relief Ass'n

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1931PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

It is claimed by defendant that the transfer of the insured property by Sander rendered the policy void.

Two reasons are assigned. One is that because notice was not given to defendant' of said transfer, the provision on that subject conforming to the standard form of insurance policy and section 8 of the bylaws of defendant were both violated.

The other is that when the transfer was made it terminated Sander’s membership in the defendant association; and that policies are effective only in favor of those who are members; hence, when Sander’s membership ceased, the policy issued to him beame…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Hastings v. . Westchester Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Palmer Savings Bank v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
  3. Hartford Fire Insurance v. OlcottIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Delaware Ins. v. GreerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
  5. Ætna Insurance v. BakerIndiana Supreme Court · 1880

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Medford v. Pacific National Fire InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Kintzel v. Wheatland Mutual Insurance Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1973
  3. Haskin v. GreeneOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Ringo v. Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Grau v. Northwestern Mutual InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1960

9 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