Legal Opinion
O'Brien v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 29, 1955PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Sullivan, J.
The plaintiff, as conservator of the beneficiary of two life insurance policies, brought this action to recover the so-called double indemnities provided for in the contracts. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed.
The finding of the court leaves much to be desired. But using it in such a manner as is warranted, we are confronted with the following facts: On October 30, 1935, the defendant issued two identical policies on the life of Mary V. Renca, each in the face amount of $250. Each policy provided in part: “Accidental Death Benefit Provisions. Upon receipt…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Stanton v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Rinaldi v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Fogarty v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Sweeney v. PrattSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- O'Meara v. Columbian National Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- State v. WhelanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Hammer v. Lumberman's Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. WalshSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Swenson v. SawoskaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- In re ZoarskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.