Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Voeltz

How courts have described this case

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

• holding insurance company to its “manifested intent” and concluding “there was an agreement in accordance with what the [insured] reasonably expected”
• “We have said that the knowledge and representations of the soliciting agent are imputed to and binding on the insurer.”
• “[T]he district court’s findings of fact have the effect of a jury verdict and are binding on us if supported by substantial evidence.”
• extrinsic evidence is evidence other than the words of the policy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).