Legal Opinion

Rathblott v. Royal Indemnity Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 30, 1932No. Appeal, 234PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Linn,

This is a suit on a burglary insurance policy. Plaintiff made out a prima facie case by reading into the record from his statement of claim averments not denied in the affidavit of defense. Defendant had there alleged that plaintiff had executed a written application containing “certain statements and representations” that were “embodied in the schedule attached to and forming part of the policy” which was “conditioned upon and was issued by the defendant in reliance upon the truth of” the statements; that one statement (quoted later) was false, and, in consequence,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Suravitz v. Prudential InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
  2. Kister v. Lebanon Mutual Ins., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, York County1889
  3. Suravitz v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  4. Radwick v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
  5. Dowling v. Merchants InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Rempel v. Nationwide Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. Armon v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  3. Lowry v. Seaboard Airline R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1948
  4. Price v. Century Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Brzyski v. SchreiberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

3 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