Legal Opinion

Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1963PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHarry B. Frank, J.

This action is brought for the recovery of moneys claimed as due under the divisible surplus feature of a group hospital and surgical policy issued by the defendant, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a mutual insurance company incorporated under the laws of this State. The unusual *618fact pattern and the somewhat cryptic pleading of the canse of action on which the case is founded reflect some of the peculiar problems which can stem from the group insurance arrangement.

The policy involved was originally issued by the defendant on June 22, 1951 to Ditto Incorporated, a Delaware corporation…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Boseman v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Ingersoll v. Liberty Bank of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  3. Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. LedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. Greeff v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  5. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1909

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Murray v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
  2. Methodist Hospital v. State Insurance FundNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Noonan v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  4. Reger v. National Ass'n of Bedding Manufacturers Group Insurance Trust FundNew York Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Associates in Adolescent Psychiatry v. Home Life InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1989

11 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