Lattavo v. Virginia Fire & Marine Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, J.,
These three oases were tried together in the court below and argued together on one brief in this court. They raise precisely the same questions and may be disposed of in one opinion.
The actions were in assumpsit on insurance policies to recover the damage done by fire to the machinery and equipment, supplies and product of plaintiff’s plant for manufacturing and bottling soft drinks.
We are obliged to reverse tbe judgments and order new venires because of a number of errors on the trial. To save time and shorten the opinion, we will, instead of discussing the assignments…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Holmes v. Chartiers Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Pittsburgh v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Cummins v. German American InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Kittanning Insurance v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Cole v. Manchester Fire Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bobereski, Adm. v. Ins. Co. of Pa.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Butler Candy Co. v. Springfield Fire & Marine Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Masood v. United States Fire Ins., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Blair County1930