Kidder v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
— The parties to this suit present contrary views as to the permissibility of an oral contract of accident insurance in this state. In her complaint, Katie M. Kidder alleged that her husband entered into one with the Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, in which contract she was named as the beneficiary, that, a few days thereafter, he was accidentally drowned, and that the company refused to pay her. On the trial of the ease, there was a verdict and judg*479ment in her favor, from which the defendant has appealed.
E. J. Martin & Company were the local agents of appellant in Spokane. H. H. Bell…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Relief Fire Ins. Co. of NY v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Way v. Pacific Lumber & Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
- Ogle Lake Shingle Co. v. National Lumber InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by6 opinions
- Douglass v. Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass'nNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1937
- Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co. v. DraperCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- National Liberty Ins. Co. v. MilliganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1926
- Yakima Lodge No. 53, K. of P. v. SchneiderWashington Supreme Court · 1933
- Eastern Shore of Virginia Fire Insurance v. KellamSupreme Court of Virginia · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.