Legal Opinion

Flood v. United State

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided January 10, 1949No. 9731PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

No useful purpose would be served by-writing an extended opinion in the case at bar. It is clear that sufficient competent evidence was introduced from which the jury could find, as they did find, that the deceased soldier had taken positive and af*222firmative steps to change the beneficiary of his insurance policy from his mother to his wife. In fact in the instant case it is unnecessary to go even as far as did the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Mitchell v. United States, 165 F.2d 758, 2 A.L.R.2d 484, affirming Rutledge v. United States, D. C., 72 F.Supp. 352, for in the case at…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1948
  2. Rutledge v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1947
  3. Flood v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1948

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Krimlofski v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1961
  2. Joseph v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API