Loos ex rel. Loos v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, St. Louis Circuit Court. The policy does not provide for the money to be paid to Loos’ executors, administrators, or assigns.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, St. Louis Circuit Court. The policy does not provide for the money to be paid to Loos’ executors, administrators, or assigns. The usual words used iii policies are these particular ones, where the sum insured goes to the estate on death of the assured. — See forms adopted by insurance companies when the administrators take the insurance; Ang. on Ins. §§ 247, 277; Way-man v. Wayman, 12 Smith, (N. Y.) 253 ; 3 Kent, 439. The word “heir” is taken to be the person who will by law of the State inherit — 1 N. J. 347. Where a policy was effected by a party for the benefit of his widow,…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
This was an action brought by the plaintiff on a policy of insurance.
It seems from the petition that Louis Loos had his life insured in the office of the defendant, by a policy dated April 4, 1866, in the sum of five thousand dollars, for the term of fifteen years. It was provided by the policy that the sum in *541sured should be payable to said Loos, if he should be living at the expiration of the said term of fifteen years, or, in case case of his prior decease, “to his heirs or representatives.” Loos died September 16, 1866, and his daughter Eliza brings this suit, as sole heir, to recover the…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Johnson v. Van EppsIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Pace v. PaceSupreme Court of Florida · 1882
- H. J. Mullins & Co. v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court · 1879
- Ordelheide v. Modern BrotherhoodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916
- Renfro ex rel. Jenkins v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.