Cantlay

Cantlay v. Olds & Stoller Inter-Exchange

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 605·7 P.2d 395
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 1932Docket No. 8069.California5,204 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burroughs, J.

This is an action brought for the purpose of reforming a contract of insurance, and for the recovery of a money judgment in case of its reformation. Judgment went for the plaintiffs and the defendant appeals.

The policy of insurance was issued to the Geo. L. Eastman Company, a corporation, hereinafter called the Eastman Company, by the defendant Olds and Stoller Inter-Exchange, an inter-insurance exchange, organized and existing under that certain act of the legislature of the state of California, known as “The Reciprocal or Inter-Insurance Act of the State of California.” (1 Deering’s Gen. Laws (1923), p. 1346, Act 3734.) Said company will hereinafter be called the Insurance Company. The plaintiffs in this action are Richard Cantlay and Joseph Tanzola, co-partners, engaged in business under the firm name and style of Cantlay & Tanzola, and will be hereinafter referred to by the copartnership name.

The evidence discloses that prior to February 15, 1925, Cantlay & Tanzola were the owners of certain motor-trucks and were engaged in the business of hauling building material for the Eastman Company, in the city of Los Angeles. That both of said parties carried insurance policies…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.