Legal Opinion

Lunn v. Ind. Lumbermen's Mut Ins. Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1947PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Tomlinson

This case comes directly to this court from the circuit court because all the facts are stipulated.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called the insurer, did for a valuable consideration issue to the defendant in error, hereinafter called the insured, an insurance policy wherein the insurer “agrees to pay for direct and accidental loss of or damage to the automobile ’ ’ of the insured with respect to the following coverages:

A. “Comprehensive — Loss of or damage to the Automobile, Except by Collision but including Fire, Theft and Windstorm”.

There was also coverage for collision or upset with…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Grigsby & Co. v. BrattonTennessee Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Moblad v. Western Indemnity Co. of DallasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  3. Great Eastern Casualty Co. v. SolinskyTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Colley v. Pearl Assur. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1946

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Rivera Robles v. Insurance Co. of Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1974
  2. Great American Insurance v. Railroad Furniture Salvage of Mobile, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1964
  3. Stephens v. New Hampshire Insurance CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
  4. General American Transportation Corp. v. Sun Insurance Office, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1966
  5. Lopez v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1955

11 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