Legal Opinion · Dissent

New York Life Ins. Co. v. Boling

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided October 19, 1936No. 32085Published

1Dissent

McGowen, J.,

delivered a dissenting opinion.

In filing this dissent I shall undertake to avoid an argument in extenso but shall content myself with a statement of the conclusions I have reached.

The main opinion, in effect, holds that the surrender charge of not more than one and one-half per cent, of the face of the policy, provided for in the policy, is not enforceable in this state for two reasons: (1) Because there was no physical, actual surrender of the policy by the insured, as held to be necessary in the case of New York Life Insurance Company v. Blaylock, 144 Miss. 541, 110 So. 432,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. New York Life Ins. Co. v. BlaylockMississippi Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Erickson v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  3. Bene v. New York Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  4. Darby v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the United StatesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1918
  5. Carter v. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API