Eddy Street Iron Foundry v. Hampden Stock & Mut. Fire Ins.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island
1Opinion of the Court
CEIFFORD, Circuit Justice.
None of the instructions given by the court are the subject of complaint, nor are they reported on the motion for a new trial. Under the circumstances, it must be assumed that they were correct. Had the instructions given been reported, there would be much less difficulty in determining whether the requests offered .by the plaintiffs were properly refused. Without the means of comparing the one with the other, some reference to the facts of the case becomes indispensable, in order that the precise nature of the questions presented may be clearly understood. No change…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jennings v. Chenango Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Glendale Woolen Co. v. Protection Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1851
- Williams v. New England Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1850
- Battles v. York Co. Mutual Fire Ins.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1856
- Walden v. New-York Firemen InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1815
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Baltimore Life Insurance v. FloydSupreme Court of Delaware · 1915
- Phœnix Insurance v. BentonIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Bradbury v. Fire InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1888
- Dimick v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
- Kelley v. Mutual Life Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.