Legal Opinion · Dissent

Davis v. National Security Life & Cas. Ins. Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 19, 1952No. 4881Published

1Dissent

McGILL, Justice.(dissenting).

If the quoted provisions appearing on pages 1 and 3 of the policy stood alone there can be no doubt that the -general rule enunciated in Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Harris, Tex.Civ.App., 68 S.W.2d 1062, wr. dis., would apply, and that the appellant would have had the entire day of September 1st, 1951, that is, until 12 o’clock midnight, in which to pay the renewal premium falling due on that date, and that the policy would have remained in force -until 12 o’clock midnight September 1, 1951, even though the renewal premium had not been paid. Pacific Mutual…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Supreme Tribe of Ben Hur v. HallIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
  2. Donaldson v. Natl. Life & Accident Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  3. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W. v. RhyneMississippi Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Public Savings Insurance Co. of America v. CoombesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
  5. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of California v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API