Kernodle v. Peerless Life Insurance
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice White
The defendant insurance company, appellant here, assigns as error the action of the chancellor in finding in favor of the beneficiary under an insurance policy issued to her deceased husband.
Said husband had in force, at the time of his death, an insurance policy providing, in part, as follows:
“This policy insures, subject to all provisions and limitations herein contained,
■%. # >*c(b) Against loss resulting from any accidental bodily *633injury sustained while this policy is in effect, hereinafter referred to as ‘such injury’;
*■4* íf íí Íí
Part One ACCIDENTAL DEATH BENEFIT FOR SPECIFIED ACCIDENTS…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bryan v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1939
- Provident Life & Accident Ins. v. PrietoTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
- New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. RustTennessee Supreme Court · 1932
- Ætna Casualty & Surety Co. v. SengelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Commercial Casualty Insurance v. McCulleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Potts v. GibsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1971
- Robert Arthur Management Corp. v. State Ex Rel. CanaleTennessee Supreme Court · 1967
- Robert Arthur Management Corp. v. State Ex Rel. CanaleTennessee Supreme Court · 1967