Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Missouri State Life Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 1, 1935PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

Must the plaintiff’s total and permanent disability have existed for a period of six months before liability attaches therefor under the certificate in suit? The answer is, Yes. Kingsland v. Ins. Co. (Mo.), 66 S. W. (2d), 959; Baker v. Ins. Co., 202 N. C., 432, 163 S. E., 110.

The same question in principle was presented in the case of Hundley v. Ins. Co., 205 N. C., 780, 172 S. E., 361, where Brogden, J., delivering the opinion of the Court, observed: “It is not deemed relevant to discuss the meaning of the six months’ clause or for what reason it was inserted in the contract. It is there in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kingsland v. Missouri State Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1933
  2. Hundley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Ammons v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Baker v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  5. Wyche v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Dewease v. Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  2. Lineberry v. Security Life & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Rivers v. State Capital Life Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Fulton v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. General American Life Insurance v. RiosTexas Supreme Court · 1942

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API