Legal Opinion

Arnold v. the Travelers Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided March 25, 1927PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStearns, J.

This is an action to recover on an accident-insurance policy issued by defendant to plaintiff to which a, supplement was attached insuring plaintiff’s wife, for the benefit of plaintiff, against damage or the loss of her life-resulting from certain specified accidental injuries.

The clause under which plaintiff claims the right of recovery, insures plaintiff’s wife “against loss resulting from bodily injuries effected directly and independently of all. other causes through external, violent and accidental means (suicide, sane or insane, not included) while riding as a-passenger in a railway…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wilkinson v. Ætna Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Houlihan v. . Preferred Accident Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
  3. Farley v. Aetna Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1918
  4. Kleis v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
  5. Kreiss v. . &198tna Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. PACIFIC MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. WaltTennessee Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Brooks v. Provident Life & Accident Co.District Court, E.D. Texas · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API