Legal Opinion

Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Ware

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 8, 1930PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Kirby, J.,

(after stating the facts). Appellant insists that the court erred in giving said instruction No. 3, but concedes that the law was pro-perly declared in re-quested instructions Nos. 1 and-2 given by the court applying the principles of law to the case made.

In Mutual Benefit & Health Assn. v. Tilley, 176 Ark. 528, 3 S. W. (2d) 320, the court, in an action by the administrator of the insured to recover -on an accident policy for the death of the insured, who was shot by his wife, the beneficiary under the policy, where the jury found the killing was intentional but not justified, held…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n v. TilleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Travelers' Protective Assoc. of America v. StephensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
  2. Gilman v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  3. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API