Wilbourn v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
1DissentChandler, J.
¶ 16. I respectfully dissent. I believe the majority errs by affirming the lower court’s dismissal of this case because the authenticity of the insurance contract is seriously placed into question by Equitable’s inclusion of two insurance applications along with the policy in the motion to dismiss. The policy’s integration clause states that “this policy, and the attached copy of the application for this policy, make up the entire contract.” The presence of multiple applications makes it impossible for any court to determine which of the applications constitutes the insurance contract.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Faulkner v. BeerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Stephens v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of USMississippi Supreme Court · 2003
- GODFREY v. Huntington Lumber & Supply CompanyMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
- Sennett v. US Fidelity and Guar. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2000
- Sheppard v. Texas Department of TransportationDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.