Skip to main content
· 11/7/1958

Balogh v. Jewelers Mutual Insurance Co.

Citations

  • 167 F. Supp. 763
  • 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3471

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that mysterious disappearance exclusion did not apply because insurer did not establish that cause of loss was a mysterious disappearance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lieb

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.