Legal Opinion

LaRocca v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 7, 1941Published

1DissentUntermyer, J.

The decision of the court produces, it seems to me, a result which is not only inequitable but which defies the intention of" all the parties to the transaction. (Compare Moore v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Assn., 121 App. Div. 335, 342.) The result is that the fraud of the insured will enrich his estate by the amount of the premiums and the beneficiary, innocent of any wrong, will receive nothing; whereas if the insured had per*262petrated no fraud against the company his estate would receive nothing under the policy and the beneficiary would receive the full proceeds. I find no controlling…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hellenberg v. District Number One of the Independent Order of BerithNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
  2. Schoenholz v. . New York Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. McLaughlin v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Pingrey v. National Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  5. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. KushmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API