Searle v. Allstate Life Insurance
California Supreme Court
1DissentMosk, J.
I dissent.
Three significant questions are raised by the major issue in this case—the meaning and effect of the standard suicide exclusion clause in life insurance policies. They are: (1) whether the clause is ambiguous; (2) what the phrase “suicide, sane or insane” means; and (3) which party bears the burden of proving suicide. The majority correctly answer the first and third questions. Their answer to the second question, however, is wrong: not only is it contrary to the plain meaning of the clause and against the great weight of authority, but it also reintroduces and indeed exacerbates…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Bigelow v. Berkshire Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Spruill v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Zuckerman v. Underwriters at Lloyd'sCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Smith v. Westland Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- De Gogorza v. . Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.