Legal Opinion · Dissent

Moriarty v. California Western States Life Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 9, 1937No. Civ. No. 9908Published

1Dissent

SPENCE, J., Dissenting.

I dissent. The effect of the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and of the majority opinion sustaining that ruling, is to declare that the evidence was insufficient to go to the jury on the issue of estoppel. I cannot agree with that declaration.

The present case differs from the ordinary case involving a single assured and a fixed premium. The action was brought upon a certificate issued under a so-called “Group Policy” and under this form of insurance the real assured, the employee, deals solely with his employer in making his contributions to the premium…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States Life Insurance v. LesserSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
  2. Reid v. Northern Assurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1923
  3. Baumann v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Hawkins v. Washington Fidelity National InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API