Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Pennsylvania Mutual Life Insurance

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 8, 1927No. Appeal 35PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

The policy of life insurance on which this action of assumpsit was based contained, inter alia, two clauses:

“Incontestability. This policy, together with the application therefor, a copy of which is attached to this policy and made a part hereof, constitutes the entire contract between the parties, and shall be incontestable after two years from the date of its issue, except for non-payment of premiums and for engaging in military or naval service in time of war without the consent in writing of an executive officer of the Company and except for death incurred in the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Feierman v. Eureka Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Hall v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  3. Central Trust Co. v. Fidelity Mutual Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  4. Doll v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Kelly v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Sipp v. Philadelphia Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Ludwinska v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  4. New York Life Insurance v. HollenderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  5. New York Life Insurance v. HollenderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

2 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