Legal Opinion

Fries v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1961PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPerry, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover under the accidental death benefit coverage of a policy of insurance issued to her husband by the defendant. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. On motion of the defendant for judgment non obstante veredicto, the trial court set aside the judgment rendered on the verdict of the jury and caused judgment to be entered for the defendant. From this order of the trial court the plaintiff appeals.

The evidence discloses that plaintiff’s husband at the time of his death was a man 71 years of age; his vocation was that of a food broker and he was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Travellers' Insurance v. McConkeySupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Penn v. Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  3. Provident Life & Accident Ins. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
  4. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. of Boston v. PlummerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942
  5. LaBarge v. United InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1956

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Insurance Company of North America v. Edna Talley EnglishCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
  2. Levatino Company v. M/S HELVIG TORMDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968
  3. Horn v. Protective Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  4. Horn v. Protective Life Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Christensen v. Prudential InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1963

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API