Standard M. Freight v. Boston Ins. Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Standard M. Freight v. Boston Ins. Co.

43 A.2d 620, 157 Pa. Super. 488, 1945 Pa. Super. LEXIS 433

DecidedApril 12, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.2d 620 (Standard M. Freight v. Boston Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Standard M. Freight v. Boston Ins. Co., 43 A.2d 620, 157 Pa. Super. 488, 1945 Pa. Super. LEXIS 433 (Pa. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Argued April 12, 1945. In this case the essential facts are substantially the same as in Standard Motor Freight, Inc. etc. v. Pennsylvania Threshermenand Farmers' Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 157 Pa. Super. 484, 43 A.2d 619, except that the defendant offered evidence that McFadden was not its writing agent. Again the defendant refused to account for the policy or explain what was done with it when issued. The only assignment of error is the refusal of the court below to enter judgment n.o.v. for the defendant. To this the defendant was not entitled as appears from the opinion filed this day in Standard Motor Freight, Inc. v. PennsylvaniaThreshermen and Farmers' Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, supra.

Judgment affirmed. *Page 489

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Argued April 12, 1945. In this case the essential facts are substantially the same as in Standard Motor Freight, Inc. etc. v. Pennsylvania Threshermenand Farmers' Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 157 Pa. Super. 484, 43 A.2d 619, except that the defendant offered evidence that McFadden was not its writing agent. Again the defendant refused to account for the policy or explain what was done with it when issued. The only assignment of error is the refusal of the court below to enter judgment n.o.v. for the defendant. To this the defendant was not entitled as appears from the opinion filed this day in Standard Motor Freight, Inc. v. PennsylvaniaThreshermen and Farmers' Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, supra.

Judgment affirmed. *Page 489

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.2d 620, 157 Pa. Super. 488, 1945 Pa. Super. LEXIS 433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standard-m-freight-v-boston-ins-co-pasuperct-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack