Legal Opinion

Amex Life Assurance Co. v. . Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1997No. S053421PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CHIN, J.

In 1991, the Amex Life Assurance Company (Amex) issued a life insurance policy to Jose Morales. The policy contained what is called an “incontestability” clause: “We will not contest coverage under the Certificate [of insurance] after it has been in force during the life of the Covered Person for two years from the Certificate Effective Date, if all premiums have been paid.”

As early as 1915, this court described this type of incontestability clause —now required by statute in all group and individual life insurance policies —as “ ‘in the nature of . . . statutes of limitations…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. New York Life Insurance v. HollenderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  3. Dibble v. Reliance Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Reagan v. Union Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  5. Ludwinska v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. American United Life Insurance v. MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007
  2. Protective Life Insurance v. SullivanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  3. Galanty v. Paul Revere Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Patterson v. Reliance Standard Life InsuranceDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2013
  5. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. GreerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998

9 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