Travelers Insurance Co. v. Stanley
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Jordan, Presiding Judge.
The “complete inability of the insured to engage in any and every occupation for wage or profit” as used in the policy here under consideration is substantially equivalent to “totally and permanently disabled . . . so as to be prevented thereby from engaging in any occupation and performing any work for compensation or profit” which the Supreme Court construed in Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 194 Ga. 138 (20 SE2d 761), relying on Cato v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 164 Ga. 392 (138 SE 787), and Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. South, 179 Ga. 653 (177 SE 499, 98 ALR…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cato v. Ætna Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. SouthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Reserve Life Insurance Co. v. AyersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961
- Mutual Life Insurance Co. of N. Y. v. BarronSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Piedmont Southern Life Insurance v. GunterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Giddens v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2006
- Knauss v. State Employees' Retirement SystemMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- Old Equity Life Insurance v. BarnardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Kooker v. Benefit Ass'n of Railway EmployeesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
- Gersbacher v. State Employees' Retirement SystemMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.