Legal Opinion

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Roma

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided October 21, 1935No. 13,462PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

delivered tlie opinion of the court.

Plaintiff in error is hereinafter referred to as the company, defendant in error as Mrs. Roma, and her deceased husband, Joseph P. Roma, as Roma.

Roma carried a $2,000 life insurance policy in the company and thereto attached a double indemnity contract for the same amount in case of accidental death not “the result of violation of law by the insured.” Some person, unknown, entered Roma’s home and shot him. The company refused payment on the ground that Roma’s death was not due to an accident but the result of his violation of law. Mrs. Roma, beneficiary,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Burt v. Union Central Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  2. Hatch v. Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
  3. DeMello v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Baker v. CouchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  5. Bowman v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Feiger, Collison & Killmer v. JonesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  2. Pierce v. St. Vrain Valley School District RE-1JSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999
  3. Equitex, Inc. v. UngarColorado Court of Appeals · 2002
  4. Continental Casualty Company v. MaguireColorado Court of Appeals · 1970
  5. Pierce v. St. Vrain Valley School District RE-1JColorado Court of Appeals · 1997

4 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