Legal Opinion

Drown v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1917No. S. F. No. 7308PublishedCited by 20 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment upon the judgment-roll alone. The court below having sustained the demurrer to the complaint' without leave to amend, the sole question presented is whether the complaint states a cause of action.

The action is by the administrator of the estate of Archer Cullen Drown to recover the proceeds of a policy issued by the defendant company insuring the said Archer Cullen Drown against death by accidental means. The complaint alleges that on June 22, 1912, the defendant issued the policy sued on whereby the company agreed “to pay . . . , in the event of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. People v. FreelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. People v. LaskoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  2. People v. BrighamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Beck v. West Coast Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Der Minasian v. Aetna Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  5. Simonton v. Los Angeles Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928

15 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