Orhowski, Admx. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, P. J.,
The facility of payment clause commonly inserted in industrial policies of life insurance imposes no duty or obligation on the insurance company to resort to its prolusions and decide, as between favo or more rival claimants, which one is equitably entitled to the insurance money due. It has the option of doing so, where no specific beneficiary is named,— (See Beard v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co., 122 Pa. Superior Ct. 174, 186 A. 239)—but is not required to avail itself of that right. It may decide to leave the legal determination of the party entitled to the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Clarke & Cohen v. Real Ex Rel. Stroudsburg Nat. BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- McKinley v. Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Barnes v. BambergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Schmidt Brewing Co. v. Pittsburgh Life & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Fidelity Trust Co. v. William Penn Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fisher v. Stevens Coal Co. (Et Al.,)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Maxwell v. Philadelphia Fire Department Relief Ass'nSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Rapp v. Germantown Fireproof Storage Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1942