Legal Opinion

Day v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the United States

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided April 7, 1936No. 1340PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McDERMOTT, Circuit Judge.

This action at law on the double indemnity clause of a life insurance policy was brought in the state court; after proper-removal, a bill of particulars was filed stating in detail the circumstances of the accident. Defendant thereupon demurred to the complaint so supplemented; the trial court sustained the demurrer and, plaintiff declining to plead further, judgment was entered for the defendant. This appeal is from that judgment.

By the clause in question, for a separate premium, defendant agreed to pay an additional $5,000 if death resulted solely from bodily…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Aschenbrenner v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Masonic Accident Insurance v. JacksonIndiana Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Head v. New York Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
  4. Bew v. Travelers' Insurance Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1921
  5. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Van FleetSupreme Court of Colorado · 1910

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n v. BowmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
  2. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. John R. Thompson Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937
  3. Gregorie v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Barnsdall Refining Corp. v. Cushman-Wilson Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
  5. Pearl Assur. Co., Limited v. School Dist. No. 1 in San Miguel County, Colo. School Dist. No. 1 in San Miguel County, Colo. v. Pearl Assur. Co., LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954

5 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