author: WOODSON, J.

text:
    THE STATE ex rel. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY v. CHARLES CLAFLIN ALLEN, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
   WOODSON, J.

— The salient facts of this case are substantially the same as those in the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided at this term by the court, In Banc, and reported at page 135 of this report. Both were by agreement submitted together, and we are of opinion that the conclusions reached in that case are controlling in this. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, C. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    THE STATE ex rel. GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE & LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION v. GEORGE H. SHIELDS, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
   WOODSON, J.

— The facts of this case are in all respects substantially the same as those in the ease of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided at this sitting of the court, In Banc, and reported at page 135.

The rulings in that case are necessarily controlling in this. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, G. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.


text:
    THE STATE ex rel. CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA v. HUGO MUENCH, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    WeIT DENIED;
   WOODSON, J.

— By stipulation of parties, this case was submitted with the case of. State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life. Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided by this court, In Banc, at the present term, and reported at page 135.

There is no difference between the substantial .facts of the two cases; and having reached the conclusion in that case that the peremptory writ of prohibition prayed for should be denied, and that the preliminary rule heretofore issued should be quashed, we, are, therefore, of the opinion that a similar judgment should be rendered in this case. It is so ordered.

All concur except Valliant, G. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.


text:
    THE STATE ex rel. EMPLOYERS LIABILITY ASSURANCE COMPANY v. DANIEL D. FISHER, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied:
   WOODSON, J.

— This case was by consent of parties submitted with the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided In Banc at the present term, and reported at page 135 of this report.

After a careful investigation of the facts and law of the case, we are satisfied that there is nothing in it to distinguish it from the Pacific Mutual case. We are of the opinion that the conclusions announced in that case are controlling in this. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition, and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, G. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.


text:
    THE STATE ex rel. FIDELITY-PHOENIX FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK et al. v. JAMES D. BARNETT, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
   WOODSON, J.

— The esséntial facts of this case and the legal principles underlying them, are substantially the same as those involved in the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided by this court, In Banc, at the present term, and reported at page 135 of this report. By consent of parties, it was submitted on briefs, in connection with that case. We have carefully considered this case, and have found no fact or principle of law governing the same which leads to a different conclusion from what was reached in that case. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition, and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, C. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the latter.


text:
    THE STATE ex rel. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY v. WILLIAM B. HOMER, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
   WOODSON, J.

— The material facts of this case are substantially the same as those in the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, reported at page 135- of this report.

By agreement of parties the two cases were submitted together; and after a careful investigation of the facts and law of the case, we are satisfied that the conclusions reached in the Pacific Mutual case, decided at the present term, are correct and controlling in this. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition prayed for, and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, G. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by the. latter.


text:
    THE STATE ex rel. GENERAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY v. DANIEL D. FISHER, Judge.
    In Banc,
    January 27, 1912.
    Prohibition.
    Writ denied.
   WOODSON, J.

— This case was submitted by agreement of parties, with the case of State ex rel. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Grimm, decided at this term by the court, In Banc, and reported at page 135 of this report.

The facts - of. the two cases are in all essential respects the same, and consequently the conclusions reached in that case are controlling in this one. We, therefore, deny the peremptory writ of prohibition, and quash the preliminary rule heretofore issued.

All concur except Valliant, G. J., and Graves, J., who dissent in a separate opinion by Graves, J.