Legal Opinion

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY v. Mulligan

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided October 21, 1969No. 1 CA-CIV 978PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAIRE, Judge.

This action was commenced because the defendant insurance company refused to pay to plaintiff certain disability benefits which plaintiff claimed were due under two separate disability policies issued by defendant. It was defendant’s contention that under the provisions of A.R.S. Sec. 20-1109 it was entitled to cancel both of the policies and decline coverage because of certain misrepresentations and omissions made by plaintiff in applications for the policies. Upon trial to a jury a verdict was returned for the plaintiff and judgment was entered in accordance therewith.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Volunteer State Life Ins. v. RichardsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Illinois Bankers' Life Assn. v. TheodoreArizona Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Ronald M. Byrnes v. The Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
  4. Robinson v. Occidental Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  5. Wageman v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1966

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Prudential v. Estate of Rojo-PachecoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
  2. Central National Life Insurance Co. v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
  3. State Compensation Fund v. Mar Pac Helicopter Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
  4. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
  5. Centrust Mortgage Corp. v. PMI Mortgage InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990

4 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