State ex rel. Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Insurance v. Barnett

143 S.W. 501, 239 Mo. 193, 1912 Mo. LEXIS 76
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided January 27, 1912·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

WOODSON, J.

— The esséntial facts of this case and the legal principles underlying them, are substantially the same as those involved in the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided by this court, In Banc, at the present term, and reported at page 135 of this report. By consent of parties, it was submitted on briefs, in connection with that case. We have carefully considered this case, and have found no fact or principle of law governing the same which leads to a different conclusion from what was reached in that case. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition, and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, C. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.

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

State ex rel. Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Insurance v. Barnett, 143 S.W. 501, 239 Mo. 193, 1912 Mo. LEXIS 76 (Mo. 1912).

143 S.W. 501 (State ex rel. Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Insurance v. Barnett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co. v. Pennsylvania Fire Insurance
184 S.W. 999 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1916)