Legal Opinion
Schroeder v. Columbia Casualty Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 16, 1925PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJames O’Malley, J.
Plaintiff moves for summary judgment and in connection therewith to correct an obvious typographical error in the complaint by substituting one date for another. The motion in so far as it prays for the correction will be granted, and the date deemed corrected for the purposes of the motion for summary judgment.
This action against the defendant insurance company is based upon section 109 of the Insurance Law (added by Laws of 1917, chap. 524, as amd. by Laws of 1924, chap. 639). It seeks, under the terms of the policy, to recover the amount of a judgment previously obtained by the plaintiff…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Roth v. National Automobile Mutual Casualty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
3Cited by12 opinions
- Commercial Casualty Ins. v. Fruin-Colnon Contracting Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1929
- Pape v. Red Cab Mutual Casualty Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1926
- Weiss v. New Jersey Fidelity & Plate Glass InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1928
- Stonborough v. Preferred Accident InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1943
- Materazzi v. Commercial Casualty InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1935
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.