Legal Opinion
Tarasowski v. Prudential Insurance
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 15, 1920PublishedCited by 11 opinions
Motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
This is a motion for a new trial. The court detected a verdict for the plaintiff. The action is to recover on a policy of insurance issued by the defendant. The policy was upon the life of plaintiff’s husband, and was made payable to the executors or administrators of his estate, “ unless payment be made under the provisions of the next succeeding paragraph ”—known as the “ facility of payment ” clause, which provided the insurance company might “ make any payment * * * to any relative by blood or connection by marriage of the insured, or to any person appearing to said company to be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shea v. United States Industrial InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Nolan v. Prudential InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Ferretti v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1906
- Heubner v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1909
- Cohen v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
3Cited by11 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Ins. v. ChappellTennessee Supreme Court · 1924
- In re the Estate of O'NeillNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
- In re the Estate of HowleyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1928
- Kasper v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
- In re the Estate of DickmanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1931
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.