Barney v. Dudley
Supreme Court of Kansas
Motion for Rehearing. Ti-ie material facts are stated in Barney v. Dudley, 40 Kas. 247, et seq., and in the opinion herein, filed on July 5, 1889.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Clogston, C.:
The motion for a rehearing is denied; but, inasmuch as this case goes back for a new trial, it is thought better to establish the rule or measure of damages the plaintiff is entitled to if she should recover. The plaintiff had, before the conversion of this policy, paid in as premiums $803.60. This included fourteen semi-annual premiums of $57.40 each. Now, to establish this sum as the plaintiff’s measure of recovery, with interest, would be to allow the insured free insurance during the seven years in which premiums have been paid. This rule would not be a correct one,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. Security Life Insurance & Annuity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Phœnix Mutual Life Insurance v. BakerIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
- Christian & Gunn v. WorshamSupreme Court of Virginia · 1883
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hamilton v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias v. NeeleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Woodworth v. HascallNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
- Hicks v. Northwestern Aid Ass'nTennessee Supreme Court · 1906
- Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias v. NeeleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911