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

  1. Arneberg v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Gotfredson v. German Commercial Accident Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
  3. Smith v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  4. Zantow v. Old Line Accident InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1920

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Indemnity Ins. v. SloanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
  2. North American Acc. Ins. v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
  3. United States v. Star Const. Co.District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1948
  4. Sloan v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of North AmericaDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1933
  5. Stahl v. Metropolitan Casualty Ins.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API