· 4/18/1891

Yore v. Bankers' & Merchants' Mutual Life Ass'n

Citations

88 Cal. 609
26 P. 514
1891 Cal. LEXIS 746

Syllabus

Insurance — Venue of Action — Corporations — Place of Contract. — An action against an insurance corporation organized under the laws of this state may he brought and tried in the county where the contract of insurance was completed, and the corporation, defendant is not entitled to a change of the place of trial to the county where it has its principal place of business, if the contract was not completed therein, although the policy was there issued. Id.—Policy Varying from Application — Proposal — Place of Acceptance— Completion of Contract.—Where an application for life insurance requested that the policy should be payable in accordance with a future will of the applicant, pending which the applicant desired to have it stand in favor of his lawful heirs, and the policy issued is made payable merely to his lawful heirs, there is no binding contract until the insured assents to the terms given in the policy by accepting the same, and the contract is to be considered as having been made in the county where the policy was accepted, and not in the county where it was issued. Id. — Proposal for Insurance — Application — Wish as to Disposition of Proceeds. — The expression, in an application for insurance, of a “desire ” to dispose of the proceeds of the,policy in a certain manner is to be construed as a proposal for insurance in accordance with the expressed wish of the applicant. Contracts — Assent. — Until all the terms of a proposed agreement have received the assent of both parties thereto, the negotiation is open, and imposes no obligation on either. Id. — Acceptance of Offer. — An acceptance, to be good, must be such as to conclude an agreement or contract between the parties, to do which it must in every respect meet and correspond with the offer,, neither falling within or going beyond the terms proposed.,

How courts have described this case

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

holding that incoming text messages to the defendant’s cell phone were not admissible as an admission by a party opponent
holding that defendant's outgoing text messages were admissible as admissions pursuant to OCGA § 24-8-801 (d) (2) (A)
“[T]he experience of narcotics investigators has been accepted as the basis to support ... cell phone searches.”
content of outgoing text messages on cell phone are considered defendant's own statements where evidence shows defendant sent the messages
content of outgoing text messages on cell phone are considered defendant’s own statements where evidence shows defendant sent the messages
text messages were party’s “own statements” because they were sent from his cell phone and “the facts of [the] case indicate[d] that [he] sent the messages.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haven

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.