Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shepherd v. Crown Life Insurance

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 7, 1974No. 11938Published

1DissentJustice Craven

I cannot agree with my colleagues that the, clause in question is unambiguous. Comparing the limitation in question with other limitations contained in the policy, it is readly apparent that the draftsmen knew how to clearly state alternative provisions. For example:

“Limitations. The insurance under this benefit shall not be payable for any of the following medical care, or services: * * * 2. Those rendered (a) in a hospital owned or operated by a government, or elsewhere at the expense of a government or agency thereof, or (b) by a physician employed by a government, for treatment in such a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Case Foundation Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1973
  2. Lenkutis v. New York Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1940
  3. United Benefit Life &C. Ins. Co. v. GlissonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
  4. Johnson v. Northern Assurance Co. of AmericaLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. Segelstrom v. Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1970

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