History
  • No items yet
midpage
Mutual Reserve Life Insurance v. Birch
200 U.S. 612
SCOTUS
1905
Check Treatment

In error to the Supreme Court of the State o'f New York.

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed with ten per cent damages, in addition to interest-and costs. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association v. Phelps, 190 U. S. 147; Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Spratley, 172 U. S. 602; Egan v. Hart, 165 U. S. 188; Richardson v. L. & N. Railroad Company, 169 U. S. 128; Young v. Valentine, 177 N. Y. 347; Woodward v. Mutual Reserve Life Insurance Company, 178 N. Y. 485; Birch v. Mutual Reserve Life Insurance Company, 181 N. Y. 583; S. C., 91 App. Div. 384.

Case Details

Case Name: Mutual Reserve Life Insurance v. Birch
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: Dec 18, 1905
Citation: 200 U.S. 612
Docket Number: No. 344
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.