Legal Opinion
Hogan v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided April 11, 1952No. 10468_1PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KALODNER, Circuit Judge.
Where a policy of life insurance provides that it may be reinstated after lapse “upon production of evidence of insurability satisfactory to the Company”, may the insurer subsequently require that (1) the insured be in sound health on the date of approval of the reinstatement application and (2) that he had not been treated by a physician in the interval between the signing of the application and its approval?
This question is presented by the instant appeal from the judgment of the court below granting appellee’s motion to dismiss 1 and its order denying the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lantz v. Vermont L. Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Rothschild v. N. Y. Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Pierkowskie v. New York Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
- Gross v. Home Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Riebel v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wanda Glezerman v. Columbian Mutual Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Gilda M. Fisher v. American National Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
- Ewoldt v. American National Insurance CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1973
- Siegel v. Continental Casualty Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1960
- Glezerman v. Columbian Mutual Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.