McNally v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
McNally v. Metropolitan Life Insurance, 199 Pa. 481 (Pa. 1901)
49 A. 299; 1901 Pa. LEXIS 641
Brown, Fell, McCollum, Mestbezat, Potter
McNally v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Opinion of the Court
We are not convinced that the Superior Court erred in reversing the judgment entered in the court of common pleas and in entering a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the suit. The provisions in the policy of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company differ materially from some of the provisions in the policies of the Prudential Insurance Company. It cannot fairly be said, therefore, that they are alike in their terms and conditions. In the policy in suit the present plaintiff was named as the beneficiary, and there is no sufficient cause shown for denying to her
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- McNally v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
- Cited By
- 6 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Insurance— Life insurance—Beneficiary—Executor. Where an application for life insurance designates a person named as sole beneficiary, and the policy provides that the “ production by the company of this policy and of a receipt for the sum assured, signed by any person, furnishing proof satisfactory to the company that he or she is the beneficiary or an executor .... of the assured, shall be conclusive evidence that such sum has been paid to and received by the person or persons lawfully entitled to the same,” the company is bound to pay the beneficiary named in the application, and it is immaterial that some of the premiums were paid by the husband of the assured, and that the policy was surrendered by him to the company as administrator of the insured.