Royal Insurance v. Miller
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice White
Whether a judgment upon a verdict enforcing against the plaintiff in error a contract of fire insurance is erroneous, is the general question for decision. The record is confused, the pleadings involved and the errors assigned numerous. We shall, therefore, at the outset state the contracts with which the controversy is concerned, the pleadings and such uncontroverted facts as are essential to be borne in mind in order to comprehend' the issues raised by the assignments of error.
On September 15, 1884, the Royal Insurance Company issued its fire policy in favor of Antonio Amadeo, “estate owner…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gormley v. BunyanSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Winne v. . Niagara Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
3Cited by11 opinions
- Downey v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1937
- Gaugler v. Chicago, M. & P. S. Ry. Co.District Court, D. Montana · 1912
- Mason v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1911
- Dulion v. S. A. Lynch Enterprise Finance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1931
- Hartley v. Lapidus & Holub Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.