Pearlman v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Steen,
This case involves the interpretation of the phrase “totally and permanently disabled” as used in two insurance policies issued to plaintiff by defendant. Plaintiff brought two suits which, by order of court, were tried together. The one claimed benefits under the two policies for the period from April 22, 1935, to October 22, 1936, and for a return of the premiums which he had paid for the years 1935 and 1936. The other claimed disability payments for the period from October 22, 1936, to December 22, 1937, and for a return of thei premiums paid for 1937. Verdicts…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. BlueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. MiltonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Ginell v. . the Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Cooper v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Ginell v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Cunningham v. COM., PENN. ST. POLICESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Sebastianelli v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Palmeri v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Piso v. Weirton Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Chase v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1973
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.