Prudential Ins. Co. v. Gray
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
In the case of New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Reynolds, 217 Ala. 307, 116 So. 151, 59 A. L. R. 1075, the waiver of the future premiums was the only question, and that was made to depend upon the circumstance that proof of disability was furnished before the premium became due. There was no disability insurance under which benefits existed before the premium was due in an amount equal to such premium.
In McGifford v. Protective Life Ins. Co., 227 Ala. 588, 151 So. 349, there was insurance against disability as well as death, but the right did not exist by the express terms of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Bergholm v. Peoria Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- McGifford v. Protective Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Prudential Ins. Co. v. CalvinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Emergency Aid Insurance Co. v. DobbsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Protective Life Ins. Co. v. HaleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Vardaman v. Benefit Ass'n of Railway Employees, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Pierce v. Capitol Life Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1990
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.