Quirk v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 193, Oct. T., 1898, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., March T., 1896, No. 445, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 193, Oct. T., 1898, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., March T., 1896, No. 445, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit. Before McMichael, J. It appears from the record and evidence that the action was brought upon a policy of life insurance; the defense was a breach of a provision of the policy, in the nature of a condition precedent, that “no obligation is assumed by tins company previous to the date hereof, nor unless on said date the insured is alive and in sound health.” The plaintiff sought to show that Timothy Fogarty made application to the defendant for a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
This was an action of assumpsit upon a policy of insurance upon the life of one Timothy Fogarty, issued by the defendant in March, 1895. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit.
On the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence the letters testamentary issued to her under the will of Timothy Fogarty, and testified that the policy in suit was issued to him, that he died on December 5, 1895, at her house, and that proofs of death were delivered to the company. In her cross-examination she asserted that he was the person examined for the insurance by the company’s physician, and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mead v. ConroeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- Jones v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Lowe v. DalrympleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Morton v. WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Confer v. McNealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Suravitz v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918