Standard Acc. Ins. of Detroit v. Hoehn
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtSayre, J.
Suit on a .policy of accident insurance. Insured, deceased, being at the t-ime in the discharge of his duties as a locomotive engineer happened to an accident in which his heel was broken, and the evidence adequately opened the way to a finding by the jury that he was otherwise hurt; but of other hurt there was no external or visible sign. This was on May 20, 1924. Following his injury insured was confined to an hospital for 10 days and thereafter to his home until his death, July 1, 1924. The defense was that insured died , of disease and hence that the contingency of his death was not…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. MeyerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Stokely v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Bates v. RidgewaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1872
3Cited by16 opinions
- Prudential Ins. Co. v. CalvinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- First Nat. Bank v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Benefit Ass'n of Ry. Employees v. ArmbrusterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Benefit Ass'n of Ry. Employees v. ArmbrusterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Inter-Ocean Casualty Co. v. JordanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.