Legal Opinion
Berke v. New York Life Insurance Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided July 12, 1940No. 32,424PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Holt, Justice.
In an order overruling a demurrer to the second amended complaint the court certified the questions presented as important and doubtful. Defendant appeals.
The complaint in this appeal is the second amended complaint. The first amended complaint, to which a demurrer was overruled, is also in the printed record, presumably to give this court the benefit of the exhaustive memorandum attached to the first order and referred to in the memorandum annexed to the order appealed from. Hereinafter the second amended complaint will be referred to simply as the complaint. Therein it is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bergholm v. Peoria Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Equitable Life Assurance Society v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Kassmir v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- Wold v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
- Holtz v. New York Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Delaware · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Robbert v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United StatesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1949
- Aetna Life Insurance Co. of Hartford v. DurwoodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
- Lindskog v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
- Wheeler v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Bernstein v. New York Life InsuranceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1956