Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Cross
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court of Clay county. Hon. Thos. B. Carroll, Judge. Suit by Chaillos Cross against the Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York. Default judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court of Clay county. Hon. Thos. B. Carroll, Judge. Suit by Chaillos Cross against the Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York. Default judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. The fact that service of process was made on the insurance commissioner does not obviate the necessity for compliance with section 920. Section 2606, dealing with the appointment of the insurance commissioner as process agent is quoted in part as follows: “Third, it shall, by a duly executed instrument filed in his office, constitute and appoint the commissioner of insurance, and his…
1Opinion of the Court
Ethridge, J.,
delivered tlie opinion of the court.
The appellee was plaintiff below and the appellant defendant. The plaintiff brought suit against the defendant on an insurance policy and served process on the state insurance commissioner under the provisions of section 2606, Code of 1906 (Hemingway’s Code, section 5069). This process was served nearly three months before the return day of the court. There was no appearance in the court by the defendant, and a default judgment was taken, and a writ of inquiry issued to assess the amount due the plain - tiff under the terms of the policy, and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. CrossMississippi Supreme Court · 1923
- Burton v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2006
- National Surety Co. v. BellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Great Southern Life Ins. v. GomillionMississippi Supreme Court · 1927