Legal Opinion

Rippel v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided February 17, 1942PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtElls, J.

This is an action upon a policy of life insurance. The plaintiff alleged performance of all the terms and conditions of the policy on the part of the insured and the beneficiary, and a refusal to pay by the defendant. The defense was that upon three occasions the policy lapsed because of nonpayment of monthly premiums and the defendant reinstated it each time in reliance upon untrue and false statements made by the insured concerning the condition of her health. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant's agent was informed by the insured of the true facts in so far as they were then known to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. MacKay v. Aetna Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
  2. Hennessy v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
  3. State Bank & Trust Co. v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
  4. Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. AsheMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Clark v. Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kelly v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  2. American Motorists Ins. Co. v. WeirConnecticut Superior Court · 1945
  3. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. v. Bolgar, No. 28 60 99 (Aug. 17, 1990)Connecticut Superior Court · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API