Legal Opinion

Stewart v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided April 9, 1932No. 30,392PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Smith, J.:

This was an action on a sickness and accident insurance policy. Judgment was for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The policy sued on contained a clause near the beginning of that document in which the company agreed to insure plaintiff “against loss of life, limb, sight or time, resulting directly and independently of all other causes, from bodily injuries sustained through purely accidental means (suicide, sane or insane, is not covered) and against loss of time on account of disease contracted during the term of this policy, respectively,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pac. Heating & Ventilating Co. v. Williamsburgh City Fire Ins. Co. of BrooklynCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Citizens State Bank v. Shawnee Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
  3. Brown v. Reserve Health & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1923

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Noel v. Continental Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1933
  2. Hildebrand v. Washington National InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1942
  3. Owen v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nSupreme Court of Kansas · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API