The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was insured and alleged that he suffered losses as a result of unspecified conduct by an assistant vice-president. D contends that P discovered the losses in May 1966 but failed to give prompt written notice of loss and proof of claim as required by the insurer's bond. P notified D of possible losses in October 1966 and filed proof of claim in November. D objected to certain interrogatories which asked D to define dishonest act and fraudulent act and to state if certain specific acts are dishonest and fraudulent. D objected in that these asked for legal opinions.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.