Legal Opinion

Amend v. Equitable Life Assurance Co. of United States

Civil Court of the City of New York

Decided February 17, 1972PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMabtiw B. Stecheb, J.

Decision was reserved on the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint at the end of the plaintiff’s case; and thereafter the jury found for the plaintiff. The action was brought by a benefiiciary to recover under the double indemnity provisions of a life insurance policy. In order to recover, she was required to prove, in the language of the policy, that death “ resulted from accidental bodily injury, directly and independently of all other causes ” and was neither “ caused [nor] contributed to, directly or indirectly, by disease or illness of any kind, [or] physical or mental infirmity.”

Di…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Silverstein v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. McGrail v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
  3. Burr v. Commercial Travelers Mutual Accident Ass'n of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1946
  4. McMartin v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934
  5. Sugarman v. New England Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1962

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Svensson v. Securian Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
  2. Ajnoha v. JC Penney Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2007
  3. Marlene S. Brothers v. CUNY Insurance Group of CMFG Life Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API