Ames v. New York Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Lees, C.
Action by the beneficiary in a policy of life insurance to recover the amount of the policy. Appellant sought to defeat a recovery on three grounds: First, that there were false statements in the application; second, that no contract of insurance was consummated; and third, that a change in the physical condition of the applicant took place between , the date of the application and the date of the delivery of the policy and that such change was concealed. At the close of the evidence there was a motion for a directed verdict. The court denied the motion and refused to submit the last…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Piedmont, Etc. Life-Ins. Co. v. Ewing, Etc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. McElroyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
- Olsson v. Midland InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Cable v. United States Life Ins. Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1901
- Johnson v. National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Stipcich v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- MacK v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Shaughnessy v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Glens Falls Indemnity Co. v. D. A. Swanstrom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Rice v. New York Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.