Legal Opinion

Sandberg v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 23, 1941No. Appeal, 173PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew,

Plaintiff, beneficiary of a life insurance policy issued by defendant upon the life of her husband, brought this action in assumpsit to recover the face amount of the contract after the death of the insured. Defendant filed an affidavit of defense and plaintiff then obtained a rule to show cause why judgment should not be entered in her.favor for want of a sufficient defense.' After argument this rule was discharged and plaintiff appealed.

■ • Accepting the essential facts to be as they are set forth in defendant’s affidavit of defense, they are as follows: Louis…

2Cited by19 opinions

  1. Dona W. Horowitz, Individually and as Co-Executrix of the Estate of Leonard N. Horowitz, Deceased Alfred Camner, Co-Executor of the Estate of Leonard N. Horowitz, Deceased v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Company, in No. 94-1900. Dona W. Horowitz, Individually and as Co-Executrix of the Estate of Leonard N. Horowitz, Deceased Alfred Camner, Co-Executor of the Estate of Leonard N. Horowitz, Deceased, in No. 94-1901 v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  2. Williams v. State Farm Insurance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Layman v. Continental Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Lynch v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Syme v. Bankers National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

14 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