Legal Opinion

Schoeneman v. Hartford Fire Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 2, 1928PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

It appears that plaintiff’s farming operations were not suecesful. He purchased the land for a small down payment, but, on account of his inability to make further payments, or to make a success of farming, he soon abandoned the place and went to work at his trade in Dallas. In the meantime he disposed of his stock and paid neither interest nor taxes on the land. He took furnished rooms at Dallas and remained there for something like a year. Thereafter he removed to Independence, where he and his housekeeper rented a dwelling and resided for another year. Plaintiff now contends that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Herrman v. . Merchants' Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Weidert v. State Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Raymond v. Farmers' Mutual Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Norman v. Missouri Town Mutual Fire, Lightning, Tornado, Cyclone & Windstorm InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Schweigert v. Beneficial Standard Life InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Smith v. Industrial Hospital Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Aerial Agricultural Service of Montana, Inc. v. TillDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1962
  4. Estate of Luster v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
  5. Purcell v. Washington Fidelity National InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1932

9 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