Holden v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for $252 on a policy of life insurance issued by the defendant to tlie plaintiff’s intestate, and alleged to bave been revived after it had lapsed.
Read the full summary
Contract for $252 on a policy of life insurance issued by the defendant to tlie plaintiff’s intestate, and alleged to bave been revived after it had lapsed. Writ dated October 3, 1902. At the trial in the Superior Court before Wait, J. the plaintiff asked the judge to rule as follows: 1. The granting of the application for a revival of the policy restored the insured to all the rights he acquired upon the date the policy was issued, subject only to such conditions as may appear in the application and instrument reviving the policy. 2. The application for revival of the lapsed policy not…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The policy having lapsed, the insured, desiring to have it revived, made an application for that purpose, and upon that application it was revived. In, this application there was a warranty that the insured had not been rejected by other insurance companies.
At the trial the defendant showed by uncontradicted evidence that the insured, previous to taking out the policy, had been rejected by other insurance companies; and it contended, among other things, that the warranty had been broken and consequently that the contract of revival was void. To this, so far as respected the application for…
2Cited by15 opinions
- New York Life Insurance v. HardisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Opara v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004
- New York Life Insurance v. BuchbergMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Reidy v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Rothschild v. N. Y. Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.