Legal Opinion

Bowlin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Decided February 26, 1959PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHoward, J.

Referring to the parties as they appeared below, the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, admits that the pleadings and issues are correctly stated in the plaintiff’s brief, as follows:

“This case originated in the General Sessions Court of Hamblen County, Tennessee. The Civil warrant filed by the plaintiff, Kyle Bowlin, against the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, alleged that the defendant had issued its policy of liability insurance to the plaintiff, which policy contained, under Coverage ‘C’ therein, a medical-pay agreement; that the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wallace v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Brown v. Tennessee Auto Ins. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Mitchell v. German Commercial Accident Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
  4. Standard Life Insurance Company v. HughesTennessee Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Murphey v. Inter-Ocean Casualty Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1933

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Tata v. NicholsTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
  2. United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. PierceIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Rosebrooks v. National General InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
  4. Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. ClineCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1963
  5. Minnick v. Federated Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1963

3 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