Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Comer v. World Insurance Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 27, 1957Published

1Concurrence

KESTEE, J.,

specially concurring.

I concur in the result, but I cannot agree with the reasoning by which the majority arrive at that result. In my opinion the result could be justified on either of two grounds:(1) Plaintiff did not plead, either in the complaint or in the reply, any fraud or mistake on the part of defendant’s agent in making out the application, nor *133any facts to show that defendant waived or is estopped to rely on the falsity of the answers. When the case was on the equity side, plaintiff pleaded estoppel in his reply; but when the case was tried on the law side plaintiff…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Kister v. Lebanon Mutual Ins., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, York County1889
  2. Morey, Administratrix v. REDIFEROregon Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Simmons v. Washington Fidelity National InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Mercer v. Germania Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Walker v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1925

11 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