Legal Opinion
Prudential Ins v. Howard
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided January 16, 1935No. 635PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By MATTHEWS, J.
It is noticed here that the plaintiff was asked on cross-examination if he had not *690been indicted, tried and acquitted of the' murder of Dorain Kircher, and he answered that he had. Had this been competent, there was no issue raised by the pleadings to which it was relevant. A beneficiary who has murdered the insured forfeits all rights under the contract (Filmore v Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 82 Oh St, 208; Smith, Admr., v Todd, Admr., 155 S. C. 323, 70 A.L.R. 1529), but the forfeiture is an affirmative defense and, of course, must be pleaded. 22 O. Jur., §771, p. 869; 5…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Starr v. Mutual Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Smith v. ToddSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1930
- Swentusky v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Mohrstadt v. Mutual Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Albers v. Security Mutual Life InsuranceSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Leube v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- Smiley v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Clements v. Ohio State Life InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1986