Legal Opinion
Leube v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 28, 1947No. 30631PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
The single question of law presented is whether a verdict should have been directed in favor of the defendant at the close of all the evidence, pursuant to the motion then made. The defendant admitted that Emma Leube had made the application for insurance and that defendant had received the first payment of premium and given a receipt therefor which is set out in the foregoing statement.
Under the law of this state such premium receipts create contracts of temporary or interim insurance. This was specifically held in the case of Duncan v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co., 137 Ohio St., 441,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Starr v. Mutual Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Williamson Heater. Co. v. RadichOhio Supreme Court · 1934
- Baltimore & Ohio Rd. Co. v. BaillieOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- Duncan v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1940
- Mohrstadt v. Mutual Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Mrs. Frances E. Quindlen v. The Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Smith v. Westland Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Service v. Pyramid Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1968
- Simpson v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
- Dunford v. United of OmahaIdaho Supreme Court · 1973
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.