Legal Opinion

Maryland Casualty Co. v. City of Taunton

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 17, 1936PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLummus, J.

This is an action of contract to recover a balance of $1,109.83 for insurance premiums not finally *70determined in advance but dependent upon the amount of payrolls during the terms of the policies. The judge found for the plaintiff in the sum of $698.48 and interest. The plaintiff brings the case here on exceptions, and contends that it is entitled to recover two items for which the judge denied recovery.

The disputed items relate to a “public liability” policy and a “standard workmen’s compensation and employers’ liability” policy, both for the year ending October 3, 1932, issued to “City of…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stoltz's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  2. Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  3. Coal Operators Casualty Co. v. C. L. Smith & Son Coal Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1951
  4. Sun Indemnity Co. v. LovellPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1938
  5. Coal Operators Cas. Co. v. CL Smith & Son Coal Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1951

1 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