Rondinella v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 22, Oct. T., 1901, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1897, No. 742, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Ferdinand Rondinel, Guardian of Joseph Rizzo, Cornelius Rizzo, Annita Rizzo and Stella Rizzo, Minors, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Assumpsit on a policy of life insurance on the life of Francis Rizzo for the benefit of certain of his children.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 22, Oct. T., 1901, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1897, No. 742, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Ferdinand Rondinel, Guardian of Joseph Rizzo, Cornelius Rizzo, Annita Rizzo and Stella Rizzo, Minors, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Assumpsit on a policy of life insurance on the life of Francis Rizzo for the benefit of certain of his children. Before Penny-packer, J. The facts were the same as in Baldi v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, ante, p. 599. The defendant presented these points: 10. As it appears under the undisputed…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
The first assignment of error raises the question whether part “ C. Medical Examination and Report ” is a part of the application within the meaning of the act of 1881. The whole paper does not differ in any essential particular from the paper construed in Baldi v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. in which case we have this day filed an opinion. Nor does the oral testimony require a different decision of the question. For the reasons there stated we hold that “C” was not part of the application, and, therefore, it was not necessary to copy it in, or attach it to, the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Rondinella v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904