Legal Opinion

DeMello v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 29, 1932PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCrosby, J.

This is an action to recover upon two policies of insurance issued by the defendant upon the life of Jose DeMello, the husband of the plaintiff, in each of which she was named as beneficiary. The second policy contained the following additional insurance: "Accidental Death Benefit Provisions. Upon receipt of due proof that the Insured after attainment of age 15 and prior to the attainment of age 70, has sustained bodily injury, solely through external, violent and accidental means, occurring after the date of this Policy and resulting in the death of the Insured within ninety days from the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. New York Mutual Life Insurance v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Ritter v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of NYSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  3. Supreme Commandery of the Knights of the Golden Rule v. AinsworthSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
  4. Burt v. Union Central Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  5. Slocum v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Miller v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  2. Three Sons, Inc. v. Phoenix InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1970
  3. Wheeler v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  4. Bowman v. Preferred Risk Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Barboza v. DecasMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API