Legal Opinion
De Groot v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 9, 1923PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*206The following opinion was filed November 8, 1922:
Eschweiler, J.
Defendant’s contentions are:
1. That the delivery of the policy to the named insured being conditional only, never became effective so as to make a contract.
2. That the insured and those claiming under him were bound by the express recital in the application as recited above to the effect that the policy should not take effect unless and until the first premium shall have been paid, and that default in such condition bars any right to recovery; and
3. That there was a demand for the return of the policy by the agent on the named…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Farnum v. Phoenix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Raulet v. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. of MilwaukeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Gardner v. North State Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Stewart v. . Union Mutual Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Whipple v. . Prudential Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Atlas Life Ins. v. UngerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
- Sachs v. North American Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930