TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mallard v. Insurance Co.

J. C. Mallard v. Aetna Life Insurance Company.

Mallard v. Ins. Co., 172 S.E. 927 (N.C. 1934)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Subsequent history: aff'd sub nom. Virginia v. Imperial Coal Sales Co., 293 U.S. 15 (1934). (read from the later opinion; check before relying)

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 10, 1934
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
172 S.E. 927205 N.C. 8461934 N.C. LEXIS 90

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

The evidence tended to show that on 24 March, 1924, the defendant issued and delivered to the plaintiff a certain policy of insurance, providing that: "If the insured becomes totally and permanently disabled and is thereby prevented from performing any work or conducting any business for compensation or profit, . . . the company will, if there has been no default in the payment of premiums, waive the payment of all premiums falling due during such disability after the receipt of such proof; *Page 847

"If such disability existed before the insured attained the age of sixty years, the company will pay to the insured the sum of ten dollars for each one thousand dollars of the amount of insurance and will pay the same sum on the same day of every month thereafter during the lifetime and the continuance of such disability of the insured, the first payment to become due on evidence of such disability."

The plaintiff offered evidence to the effect that he became disabled within the terms of the policy in August, 1925. There was also evidence to the contrary.

The following issue was submitted to the jury: "Did the plaintiff on 30 August, 1925, become totally and permanently disabled, and thereby prevented from performing any work or conducting any business for compensation or profit." The jury answered the issue "No," and from judgment upon the verdict denying recovery, the plaintiff appealed. An examination of the record discloses no reversible error either in the admission of evidence or in the charge of the trial judge. The merit of the controversy involved an issue of fact, and such issue has been determined by the jury adversely to the plaintiff.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1934: 11936: 119342026peak 1934 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Virginia v. Imperial Coal Sales Co.293 U.S. 15 (1934)
  2. Commonwealth v. Imperial Coal Sales Co.183 S.E. 234 (Va. 1936)

Most recent

  1. Commonwealth v. Imperial Coal Sales Co.183 S.E. 234 (Va. 1936)
  2. Virginia v. Imperial Coal Sales Co.293 U.S. 15 (1934)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list