Mehaffey v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBeogdeN, J.
Was the opinion of the coroner based upon the post mortem examination, that the assured died “from some poisonous sub*704stance taken internally” sufficient evidence to warrant recovery upon tbe policy and ward off a nonsuit?
Tbe evidence discloses tbat for sometime prior to bis death tbe deceased bad been drinking heavily and continuously. There was no evidence tbat the deceased bad taken a drink on tbe morning of bis death, but be bad been to a cafe and consumed a glass of buttermilk. All tbe evidence was to tbe effect tbat tbe buttermilk was wholesome. Shortly after drinking tbe buttermilk tbe…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States Mutual Accident Ass'n v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Christ v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
- Olinsky v. Railway Mail Assn.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Calkins v. National Travelers Benefit Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Harris v. Jefferson Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
3Cited by8 opinions
- Dalbey v. Equitable L. Assur. Soc. of U.S.Montana Supreme Court · 1937
- Murphy v. Western & Southern Life Ins. Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1953
- Griswold v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1935
- Jacobson v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1940
- Cramer v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceAtlantic County Circuit Court, N.J. · 1940
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.