Legal Opinion

Columbus Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hines

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 1935No. 25072PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtZimmerman, J.

In support of her right to recover, the beneficiary takes the position that since the policy had been in force for more than three years, even though the indebtedness of the insured to the company equalled or exceeded the cash or loan value of the policy, the company could not, upon the failure of the insured to pay the loan when due, summarily declare the policy void, having failed to give the month’s notice stipulated under the “loan” clause of the policy; that the failure to give such notice continued the insurance in force until the insured’s death, at which time the beneficiary had the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mills v. National Life InsuranceTennessee Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Rye v. New York Life InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. FiquettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
  4. Jeske, Admx. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  5. Schoonover v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Great Horizons Development Corp. v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1978
  2. Rick v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. Boring v. the Kentucky Home Mutual Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1942
  4. First United Life Insurance v. Northern Indiana Bank & Trust Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Perry v. GambleOhio Court of Appeals · 1938

1 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