DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Watson v. Metropolitan Life Ins., 162 So. 790.

23 citing documents.

  • Delta Life Ins. Co. v. Martin 59 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    25 , , and in DeCoy v. First National Life Insurance Company, 184 La.
  • Smith v. Washington Nat. Ins. 56 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
    25 , ; Givens v. Washington National Insurance Company, La.App., 170 So.
  • Edwards v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 12 So. 2d 708 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
    25 , ), the insurance company is without right to require the insured, by provision in its policy or otherwise, to elect, in advance of a lapse of the policy for non-payment of premiums, which one of the three options he will exercise and that, in the event he does not exercise any one of the three at the date of the lapse
  • Jacobs v. Louisiana Industrial Life Ins. Co. 12 So. 2d 227 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1943
  • Edwards v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 11 So. 2d 125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1942
    25 , , 793, our Supreme Court declared that, in enacting the statute of 1906, the legislature evidenced a clear intention of granting to the insured, upon the lapsing of a policy, the privilege of selecting one of the three well-recognized methods of applying its surrender value.
  • Hammon v. Occidental Life Ins. Co. 3 So. 2d 694 La. 1941
    25 , ; and McBride v. Acme Industrial Life Insurance Society, 179 La.
  • Dominique v. Liberty Industrial Life Ins. Co. 192 So. 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1939
    25 , , 793, our Supreme Court plainly declared that, in enacting the statute of 1906, the legislature evidenced an intention to prevent insurers' from inserting restrictions which might in any way interfere with or limit the operation of section 2 of the Act of 1906.
  • Cruze v. Life Ins. Co. of Virginia 184 So. 735 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    25 , , decided that stipulations in life insurance contracts with respect to paid-up insurance, such as those contained in the policies in suit, were violative of Act No. 193 of 1906 and that the assured under a lapsed policy was automatically entitled to extended insurance in the event he did not avail himself of any othe
  • Smith v. Unity Industrial Life Ins. Co. 183 So. 585 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
  • Cook v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 181 So. 671 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    25 , , it was held that although no mention is made of extended insurance in the policy, an insured would, nevertheless, be entitled to such extension as granted by Act No. 193 of 1906, when no selection of any other benefit is made by the assured upon the surrender of the policy.
  • Turner v. Peoples Industrial Life Ins. Co. 180 So. 435 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
    25 , , the policy, when it lapsed for the first time in 1929, was entitled to automatic extension for so long a time as the accumulated reserve of some eight years would pay for on the premium rate basis of the company.
  • Hooks v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 171 So. 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
    25 , , held that under such circumstances the *602 reserve accumulated on a lapsed policy must be applied to the purchase of extended insurance for the full face amount of the policy for such term as the reserve will purchase, rather than to the purchase of paid-up insurance for a smaller amount-Thereafter, as a result of
  • American Surety Co. of New York v. Ryan 170 So. 34 La. 1936
  • Johnson v. Life Ins. Co. of Virginia 169 So. 159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    25 , , would have “carried” the policy in full coverage until — and, in fact, substantially beyond— the time of the death of the insured.
  • Schexnayder v. Unity Industrial Life Ins. Co. 168 So. 732 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    25 , , in holding that Act No. 193 of 1906 applied to industrial life insurance companies, decided that under the provisions of section 1 of the act such accumulated reserves, in the absence of the exercise of any option on the part of the insured, automatically applied to the payment of extended in- • surance.
  • Furlong v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 169 So. 431 La. 1936
  • Smith v. Liberty Industrial Life Ins. Co. 167 So. 100 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
    25 , , it was held that this act applies to industrial life insurance policies.
  • Devine v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co. of Nashville 166 So. 522 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1936
  • Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 162 So. 799 La. 1935
    25 , , and Crump v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 183 La.
  • Cryer v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 162 So. 804 La. 1935
    25 , , this day decided.
  • Foley v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 162 So. 798 La. 1935
    25 , , this day decided.
  • Crump v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 162 So. 800 La. 1935
    25 , , this day decided.
  • Williams v. National Life Accident Ins. Co. 162 So. 803 La. 1935
    25 , , this day decided.