No. 29,767. Precedential Processed

Schmidt v. Agricultural Ins. Co.

Minnesota Supreme Court · Filed January 26, 1934

Opinion text

There is evidence showing that a contract to renew the insurance was made by Almen. But there is, in my judgment, no basis for a finding that his undertaking was binding, or ever intended to be so, upon appellant, Agricultural Insurance Company. In all other questions dealt with by the opinion I agree. *Page 593