Dwinnell v. Kramer
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of tbe municipal court of Minneapolis, Holt, J., overruling a demurrer to tbe answer.
1Opinion of the Court
START, O. J.
This is an appeal from an order of tbe municipal court of tbe city of Minneapolis overruling tbe plaintiffs’ demurrer to tbe answer herein.
Tbe complaint alleged that tbe Minneapolis Fire & Marine Mutual Insurance Company, hereafter designated as tbe company, is a corporation organized under Laws 1895, c. 175, to do a mutual fire insurance business; that on April 3, 1900, tbe company, at tbe request of tbe defendants,, and in consideration of $9.20, as premium, executed to them its policy of insurance, which is made a part of tbe complaint; that on March 5, 1901, tbe company was by…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Pink v. A. A. A. Highway Express Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Taggart v. Wachter, Hoskins & Russel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- Dwinnell v. Minneapolis Fire & Marine Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Swing v. HumbirdSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Moreland v. KnoxCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1954
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.