Legal Opinion

Freed v. Inland Empire Insurance

District Court, D. Utah

Decided September 25, 1957No. C-157-55PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHRISTENSON, District Judge.

The Aberdeen-Springfield Canal Company of Pocatello, Idaho, sometimes referred to herein as “the canal company” or as “the claimant”, has filed claim against the Receiver of Inland Empire Insurance Company, hereafter sometimes called “the insurance company”, for the amount of damages paid by the former to various farmers for the flooding of lands through a break in its main canal. Liability insurance coverage is conceded by the insurance company, and there is no question raised as to the reasonableness of settlements made by the canal company with the landowners.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Burt v. Farmers' Co-Operative Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Coulson v. Aberdeen-Springfield Canal Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1924
  3. McCarty v. Boise City Canal Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Jensen v. Davis & Weber Counties Canal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Spurrier v. Mitchell Irrigation DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Diversified Mortgage Investors v. U. S. Life Title Insurance Company of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
  2. Brizendine v. Nampa Meridian Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Gates Formed Fibre Products, Inc. v. Imperial Casualty & Indemnity Co.District Court, D. Maine · 1988
  4. Rupp v. Transcontinental InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2008
  5. Brizendine v. Nampa Meridian Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1976

1 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