Legal Opinion
Hartzell v. Maryland Casualty Co.
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided October 4, 1911No. Gen. No. 15,727PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edward A. Dicker, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1909.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Graves
This is a suit begun August 24, 1908, in the Municipal Court of Chicago by Emma L. Hartzell, the beneficiary named in an accident insurance policy issued by the defendant for five thousand dollars taken out by her husband, John H. Hartzell.
The declaration sets out the policy in haec verba. The nineteenth paragraph of the policy contains the following provisions:
“Legal proceedings for recovery hereunder may not be brought until after three months from date of filing final proofs at the Company’s Home Office, nor brought at all, unless begun within six months from time of death * * *”
It is…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Riddlesbarger v. Hartford InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Melson v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
- Arthur v. . Homestead Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Guthrie v. Indemnity Ass'nTennessee Supreme Court · 1899
- Chichester, Admr. v. New Hampshire Fire Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Sun Insurance Office Limited v. John ClayCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Trichelle v. Sherman & Ellis, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1930
- Lawson v. FayartAppellate Court of Illinois · 1934
- Clay v. Sun Ins. Office Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Clay v. Sun Ins. Office Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.