Legal Opinion

Whitcomb v. Automobile Insurance

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 28, 1926No. 25,211PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Qíüinn, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion in the alternative for judgment or for a new trial, which presents the following state of facts:

Plaintiffs are father and son, engaged as copartners in buying, selling, repairing and storing used automobiles. Defendant is a foreign corporation duly authorized to transact a general theft and fire insurance business within the state of Minnesota. The Lewis Insurance Agency is the local representative of such insurance company.

William Hooks was engaged in the taxicab business in Minneapolis. In January, 1921, he purchased a…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Jones v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Price v. Standard Life & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  3. Johnson v. National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  4. O'Connor v. Modern Woodmen of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  5. Mattson v. SamaritansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gertler v. BowlingSupreme Court of Virginia · 1960
  2. Mattechek v. PughOregon Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Checkpoint Foreign Car Service, Inc. v. SweeneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  4. Southland Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934
  5. Fitzgibbon Discount Corp. v. WindischMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954

2 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