Legal Opinion
Harry L. Sheinman & Sons, Inc. v. Scranton Life Ins.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided January 16, 1942No. 7822PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JONES, Circuit Judge.
The question here involved is whether the plaintiff, as beneficiary of a double indemnity life insurance policy, made out a case, within the requirements of the policy, sufficient to support the jury’s finding that the insured died because of “bodily injuries effected solely through external, violent or accidental means” and not “from bodily * * * disease * * * 0r * * * infirmity; * *
The insured fell in front of a subway train in New York City. As a result, he suffered a fractured skull and his death ensued immediately. The insurer paid the face amount of the policy for…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Silverstein v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- De Reeder v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Kelly v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Waggaman v. General Finance Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Scott Hammersmith v. Tig Insurance Company (w.d. Of Pa. Civil Nos. 02-Cv-01829 & 03-Cv-01333)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Parkway Baking Co. v. Freihofer Baking Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
- Crawford v. Manhattan L. Ins. Co. of NYSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Frericks v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- McLouth Steel Corp. v. Mesta MacHine Co. Foster v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (Landis Tool Co., Third-Party Defendant)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1954
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.