Legal Opinion

James N. Tardy Co. v. Board of Insurance Commissioners

Texas Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1931No. 5682PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. Commissioner LEDDY

delivered the opinion of the court.

If a corporation, with a sufficiently comprehensive purpose clause, is ■entitled, under the laws of this state, ■ to be licensed as an agent for an insurance company, writing fire, marine and casualty insurance, the writ of mandamus prayed for must be awarded, otherwise it .should be denied.

Relators insist that in the absence of a statute specifically prohibiting a corporation from being licensed to act as an agent for a fire, marine, or -casualty insurance company the board of insurance commissioners was ¡not justified in arbitrarily…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Crall & Ostrander v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1905
  2. Rogers v. RameyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
  3. Standard Oil Co. v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1900
  4. Saufley v. Lincoln Bank Trust CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
  5. Saufley, Insurance Commissioner v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. In Re OCA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
  2. Guardian Consumer Finance Corp. v. LangdeauCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
  3. Shaw v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
  4. National Auto Service Corp. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  5. Nilsen v. DAVIDSON INDUSTRIES, INC.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961

10 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