Arnold v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 30, March T., 1903, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Mifflin Co., Aug. T., 1900, No. 117, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Daniel J. Arnold v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of New York. Assumpsit upon a life insurance.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 30, March T., 1903, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Mifflin Co., Aug. T., 1900, No. 117, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Daniel J. Arnold v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of New York. Assumpsit upon a life insurance. Before Bailey, P. J. At the trial defendant presented these points : 5. George Arnold, the insured, in his application for the policy of insurance in this case in paragraph four, having answered and stated “ The following is the name of the physician who last attended me, the date of the attendance and the name of the complaint for which he attended me,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
When this case was here before (20 Pa. Superior Ct. 61), we said, referring to the testimony of Dr. Reber and others : “ The credibility of the witnesses was, under the circumstances, for the jury and we, therefore, send the case back for a retrial.” It would be a reversal of ourselves to reverse the court below now for doing that which we then said should be done. We would have no hesitation in doing this, if we were previously in.the wrong. Were we wrong ?
It must be remembered that the testimony of Dr. Reber was itself a contradiction of the representations of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lonzer v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Arnold v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clark v. Metropolitan Life Ins.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Piacine v. National Life Insurance Co. of United States, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1930