Cheek v. Pilot Life Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaeNhill, J.
The “Binding receipt” delivered by the defendant’s agent to the plaintiff at the time application for insurance was made and two weekly premiums paid does not constitute a contract of insurance. The terms of the receipt make the consummation of the contract dependent upon the approval of the application by defendant at its home office. Gardner v. Ins. Co., 163 N. C., 367; Insurance Company v. Young’s Administrator, 90 U. S., 85, 23 L. Ed., 152; Hill v. Life and Casualty Insurance Company, 181 S. E., 104. Speaking to the subject in Gardner v. Ins. Co., supra, Walker, J., says: “When properly…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Insurance Co. v. Young's AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Gardner v. North State Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Francis v. Mutual Life Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1910
- Hill v. Life & Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
3Cited by11 opinions
- Allen v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
- Maddox v. Life & Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
- Jones v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1968
- Kathryn S. Wright v. Pilot Life Insurance Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
- McLean v. Life of VirginiaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.