Skip to main content
· 9/21/1932

Anderson, Exr. v. Houpt

Citations

  • 184 N.E. 29
  • 43 Ohio App. 538
  • 13 Ohio Law. Abs. 16
  • 1932 Ohio App. LEXIS 322

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • presumption that the department of insurance did its duty and had ascertained that the policy in question complied with the requirements of law
  • presumption that the department of insurance did its duty and had ascertained that the policy in question complied with the requirements of law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lemert, Sherick, Montgomery

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.