Legal Opinion

Continental Casualty Co. v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided June 9, 1906No. 14,649PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from Harvey district court; Peter J. Galle, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

MASON, J.:

Grant G. Johnson held a policy of insurance issued by the Continental Casualty Company, the principal purpose of which was to provide indemnity to the amount of ten dollars a week- against loss occasioned by accidental injury, its phraseology being that usually employed in contracts of that character. It also contained a provision as follows;

“The loss of . . . time, as above provided, due solely to . . . sunstroke or freezing due solely to *130necessary exposure while engaged in his occupation, shall be deemed to be due to external, violent and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dozier v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1891
  2. Insurance Co. v. TrefzSupreme Court of the United States · 1881

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bryant v. Continental Casualty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Goethe v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1937
  3. Elsey v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Continental Casualty Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  5. Farmer v. Railway Mail Assn.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1933

2 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