Legal Opinion
Elkins v. Ætna Life Ins. Co. of Hartford
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided May 5, 1928No. 979PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUTCHESON, District Judge.
This is a suit on an accident policy containing a pro rata clause as follows:
“In the event the insured is injured after having changed his occupation to one classified by the company as more hazardous than that stated in the policy, or while he is doing any act or thing pertaining to any occupation so classified, except ordinary duties about his residence or while engaged in recreation, in which event the company will pay only such portion of the indemnities provided in the policy as the premium paid would have purchased at the rate but within the limite so fixed by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Arneberg v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Gotfredson v. German Commercial Accident Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Smith v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
- Zantow v. Old Line Accident InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
3Cited by5 opinions
- Indemnity Ins. v. SloanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
- North American Acc. Ins. v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
- United States v. Star Const. Co.District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1948
- Sloan v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North AmericaDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1933
- Stahl v. Metropolitan Casualty Ins.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1933