Legal Opinion · Dissent

Katzman v. Ætna Life Insurance

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

Decided February 15, 1955Published

1DissentCohn, J.

While I agree that the purpose of the statute (Personal Property Law, § 31, subd. 9) is an excellent one, I think that the facts as claimed by plaintiff, which for the purposes of this motion for summary judgment we must accept as true, take this case out of the Statute of Frauds.

*448The facts alleged follow: Plaintiff is the widow of the deceased. Prior to his death, they had been married for some twenty-six years, during which time they lived happily together. The insurance policy was procured and issued on May 24, 1944, upon a mutual agreement and understanding between the widow and deceased…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Beatty v. . Guggenheim Exploration Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Latham v. Father DivineNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
  3. Lightfoot v. . DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  4. Blanco v. VelezNew York Court of Appeals · 1946
  5. Cassidy v. CassidyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API