When consistent with the context and not obviously used in a different sense, the term "company" or "insurance company", as used in this chapter, includes all corporations, associations, partnerships, or individuals engaged as principals in the business of insurance or guaranteeing the obligations of others.
The word "domestic" designates those companies or other insurers incorporated or formed in this state; and the word "foreign", when used without limitation, includes all those formed by authority of any other state or government, and whose home office is not located in this state.
A contract of insurance is an agreement by which one party for a consideration promises to pay money or its equivalent, or to do some act of value to the assured, upon the destruction, loss, or injury of something in which the assured or other party has an interest, as an indemnity therefor.
Codes, 1906, §§ 2562, 2563; Hemingway's 1917, §§ 5027, 5028; 1930, §§ 5130, 5131; 1942, §§ 5632, 5633.
Notes of Decisions
Morgan v. City of Ruleville, 627 So. 2d 275 (Miss. 1993).
· cites it 3× “A contract of insurance is defined in Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (1972) as "an agreement by which one party for a consideration promises to pay money or its equivalent, or to do some act of value to the assured, upon the destruction, loss, or injury of something in which the…”
Sawyers v. Herrin-Gear Chevrolet Co., Inc., 26 So. 3d 1026 (Miss. 2010).
· cites it 2× “" See Miss.Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (Rev.1999). As stated by the trial court, based on those definitions, "one could certainly argue that the Agreement is in fact an insurance policy.”
Cent. Insurers of Grenada, Inc. v. William Greenwood, 268 So. 3d 493 (Miss. 2018).
“Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (Rev. 2011). Central argues that it does not meet this definition of an "insurance company" because it only acts as an agent for other companies and therefore is not engaged as a principal in the insurance business.”
Mosby v. Moore, 716 So. 2d 551 (Miss. 1998).
“In that case, this Court said that the Mississippi Municipal Liability Plan does not fit within the definition of insurance under Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (1991), which is general liability insurance sufficient to waive sovereign immunity pursuant to Miss.”
Burley v. Homeowners Warranty Corp., 773 F. Supp. 844 (S.D. Miss. 1990).
“Plaintiffs next urge that under Miss.Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (1972), HOW must be considered an “insurance company.”
Mccoy v. South Cent. Bell Tel. Co., 688 So. 2d 214 (Miss. 1996).
“Further, this Court has held that, for purposes of sovereign immunity, self-insurance is not a contract for insurance within the meaning of Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 but is instead a risk-sharing pool insufficient to waive sovereign immunity as would a policy of general liability…”
Gardner v. State, 547 So. 2d 806 (Miss. 1989).
“Miss.Code Ann. §§ 83-5-5, *807 83-5-69, 83-19-75, and 97-1-1 (1972).”
Coleman v. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins., 930 F. Supp. 255 (N.D. Miss. 1996).
“Miss.Code Ann. § 83-5-5. The Morgan court essentially found that the MMLP did not meet this definition, but rather that “the MMLP is a non-profit organization created to share the liability of municipalities.”
Time Ins. v. Sams, 692 F. Supp. 663 (N.D. Miss. 1988).
“In support of its public policy argument, Time directs the court’s attention to Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (1972), which defines a contract of insurance as follows: A contract of insurance is an agreement by which one party for a consideration promises to pay money or its…”
Alma McCoy v. South Cent Bell Telph Co (Miss. 1994).
“Further, this Court has held that, for purposes of sovereign immunity, self-insurance is not a contract for insurance within the meaning of Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 but is instead a risk-sharing pool insufficient to waive sovereign immunity as would a policy of general liability…”
Daphne Mosby v. Andrew Moore (Miss. 1995).
“In that case, this Court said that the Mississippi Municipal Liability Plan does not fit within the definition of insurance under Miss. Code Ann. § 83-5-5 (1991), which is general liability insurance sufficient to waive sovereign immunity pursuant to Miss.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.