Northern Assurance Co. of America v. Roll

How courts have described this case

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

• in action brought by insured against insurer to recover on fire policy, testimony concerning the sexual preferences of plaintiff was properly excluded as irrelevant and prejudicial
• trial court “did not err in excluding testimony concerning the sexual preferences of [the insured]. The proffered evidence was irrelevant and prejudicial; it had no bearing on the issues in this case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).