Legal Opinion
Pullen v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided June 19, 1981No. 80-132PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Appeal by defendant Louise P. Pullen, as administratrix, from an adverse judgment rendered in a declaratory judgment action brought by plaintiff Cincinnati Insurance Company and in which State Farm Fire and Casualty Company is intervenor. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
In December 1975 Cincinnati issued a policy of insurance to the City of Homewood for a three-year period. This policy was a "Comprehensive Property and Casualty Insurance Policy."
In January 1976 Cincinnati issued a policy of insurance to the Homewood Board of Education, also for a three-year period. This policy…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Holm v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Insurance Cos. v. ScalesTennessee Supreme Court · 1899
- Stanley v. American Fire & Cas. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1978
- People v. SalsburyMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Sheely v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1912
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Pacific Indemnity Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Luneau v. Peerless InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
- Ohio Casualty Group of Insurance Companies v. Raymond Gray and Carl J. HallgarthCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Vallas v. Cincinnati Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993
- Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. CulpepperCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1983
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.