Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Stilson
District Court, D. Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
JOYCE, District Judge.
On September 29, 1938, the defendant C. W. Stilson, a resident of Duluth, Minnesota, was the owner of a Buick automobile. He had theretofore and on or about the 22nd day of April, 1938, procured from the plaintiff company a policy of insurance containing among others the following provision as to those who were insured thereunder: “Definition of Insured. The unqualified word ‘insured’- wherever used in Coverages A and B and in other parts of this policy, when applicable to these coverages, includes not only the named insured but also any person while using the automobile…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Aetna Life Insurance v. HaworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. QuarlesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
- Stovall v. New York Indemnity Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1928
- Dickinson v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. BeverfordenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Vezolles v. Home Indemnity Co., New YorkDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1941
- Eicher v. Universal UnderwritersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Wallin v. KnudtsonWashington Supreme Court · 1955
- Yorkshire Indemnity Co. of New York v. CollierCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1949
- Auto Owners (Mutual) Insurance v. StanleyDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1967
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.