Dullum v. Northern Life Insurance
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrand, J.
It is elementary that the complaint must set forth that the plaintiff has suffered a disability as defined in the policy. By comparing the provisions of the policy with the allegations of the complaint, it will appear that the “disability” covered by the policy means bodily injury or disease which, independently of all other causes, prevents the insured from performing any work or following any occupation for wages or profit. The complaint contains no such allegation, but on the contrary alleges that “on account of such disability the plaintiff could not and did not perform any of the duties…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Great Southern Life Ins. Co. v. JohnsonTexas Commission of Appeals · 1930
- Cooper v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Hoffman v. Employer's Liability Assurance Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1934
- Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
- Stinchcombe v. New York Life Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1905
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lundquist v. Illinois Life & Accident InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1960
- Bonacci v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Prevosky v. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANYOregon Supreme Court · 1972
- Twilleager v. North American Accident Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1964
- Todd v. Occidental Life InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.