Legal Opinion

Hudson Mfg. Co. v. New York Underwriters' Ins.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided June 7, 1929No. 4110PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

■ PAGE, Circuit Judge.

Appellant’s sole contention is that the method of fixing the loss, as provided in clauses 2 and 3 of section III of the rider attached to the insurance policies sued on, is illegal, because of the provisions of the Wisconsin statutes.

Following the space at the top for the insertion of the name of the company issuing the poliey, the face of the Wisconsin standard fire insurance policy reads (Wis. Stats. 1927, p. 1652);

“Amount $-Rate-Premium $-
“In consideration of the Stipulations herein named and of - dollars Premium Does Insure - and legal representatives, to the extent…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Wisconsin Inspection Bureau v. WhitmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. California Insurance v. Union Compress Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Ermentrout v. Girard Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  4. Heim v. American Alliance Insurance Co. of New YorkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  5. Brecher Furniture Co. v. Firemen's InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Polytech, Inc. v. Affiliated Fm Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
  2. Thorrez & Maes Mfg. Co. v. American Central Ins.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1939

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API