Legal Opinion

Lampke v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

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

Decided June 30, 1937Published

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The question of knowledge of the company of the ill-health, previous disease and treatment by a physician on which to base waiver or estoppel was one of fact depending on statements of the insured to defendant’s soliciting agent and to defendant’s examining physician. (Bible v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co., 256 N. Y. 458; Salamida v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co., 148 Misc. 702; affd., 241 App. Div. 636.) As the credibility of defendant’s examining physician was for the jury, the jury could have found that there was no concealment…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bible v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. Fortunato v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Fortunato v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
  4. Salamida v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. of BostonNew York Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Salamida v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API