Legal Opinion

Phillips v. Reserve Life Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 4, 1954No. Civ. 4768PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, J.

The trial court sustained defendant’s demurrer to plaintiff’s second amended complaint without leave to amend and ordered a dismissal of the complaint. Plaintiff appealed. A demurrer to the second amended complaint by a codefendant, William J. Coffman, was overruled.

This amended complaint alleges as a first cause of action, in substance, that about June 1, 1952, defendant Reserve Life Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as the company) issued a policy of insurance in the sum of $10,000 on the life of Hyde Phillips (a copy of the policy is attached to the complaint); that the premiums…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Farnum v. Phoenix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Washer v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Richards v. Travelers Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Orloff v. Metropolitan Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Arnold v. American Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1906

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Farr v. BramblettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  2. Skopp v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Scott v. Federal Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Silva v. National American Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Walker v. Home Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1956

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