Legal Opinion
Fishbeck v. New York Life Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 9, 1923PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
This action is governed by the law of the state of Oklahoma and not by the law of this state. The application was made in Oklahoma where the insured resided. The policy was delivered to him in that state and in that state he paid the premiums. The law of Oklahoma was *374pleaded by defendant; the decisions of that state were offered in evidence and parol testimony by a lawyer familiar with the laws of Oklahoma was given as to their construction.
The statute in force when the application was made was sec. 3467, Rev. Laws 1910, and was as follows:
“In any claim arising under a policy which has been…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Continental Casualty Co. v. OwenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Owen v. United States Surety Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Eminent Household of Columbian Woodmen v. PraterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- American Bankers' Ins. Co. v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- National Union v. KelleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- New York Life Ins. Co. v. CarrollSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- Parke v. New York Life InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1933
- Atlas Life Ins. Co. v. HoltSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Houston v. New York Life Insurance Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
- American State Bank v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, Defendant-RespondentCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1964