Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1923–1996 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Scales v. Jefferson Standard Life Ins. Co.green2 sentences1996Co., 295 S.W. 58, 60 (Tenn. 1927) (which holds that an incontestable clause does "not make the insurer liable for a larger sum than would otherwise be due under the policy.") Searcy v. Fidelity Banker’s Life Ins.. 1965The Court held that that was a contractual relationship and the fact that the insured died during that period of time; that though suit had been brought, and that a letter had been written setting out some reason for denying the liability within the period, that no effective effort had been made under that clause which fixed the liability of the company as an incontestable matter except for the non-payment of dues, which is similar in this case for the “non-payment of dues or for fraud.” In Scales v. Jefferson-Standard Life Insurance Company, 155 Tenn. 412 , 295 S.W. 58 , 55 A.L.R. 537 , there | 1 | 3 |
Searcy v. Fidelity Bankers Life Insurance Co.green2 sentences1996Co., 656 S.W.2d 39, 40 (Tenn. App. 1983), holding that an incontestable clause does not expand or enlarge coverage. 1996Co., 656 S.W.2d 39, 40 (Tenn. App. 1983), holding that an incontestable clause does not expand or enlarge coverage. | 1 | 1 |
Carothers v. Atlanta Life Ins. Co.green1 sentence1996Co., 159 S.W.2d 830, 831-32 (Tenn. 1942). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
The First Pennsylvania Banking And Trust Company v. The United States Life Insurance Company In The City Of New York
green
1 sentence1983In First Pennsylvania Banking And Trust Co. v. United States Life Insurance Co. in the City of New York, 421 F.2d 959 (3rd Cir.1969), applying Pennsylvania law, the Third Circuit, adopting the holding in Fisher v. United States Life, supra, and declining to follow the Simpson case, held that the incontestable clause of a life insurance policy relates to defenses that go to the validity of the policy, but it did not enlarge the coverage of the policy to compel the insurance of lives that the insurer never intended to cover, or to accept risks or hazards clearly excluded by the policy. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Lebanon v. Dillard
neutral
1 sentence1942The suicide clause relates to the latter.’ ” [ 155 Tenn., 412 , 295 S. W., 60 , 55 A. L. | 1 | 1942–1942 |
Colonial Trust Co. v. Pacific Packing & Navigation Co.
neutral
1 sentence1930A leading case upon this subject is Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association v. Austin, 142 Fed., 298 , 6 L. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Childress v. Fraternal Union of America
neutral
1 sentence1927On principle, the holding in Childress v. Fraternal Union, supra, appears to control here. | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Ramsey v. Old Colony Life Insurance
neutral
1 sentence1923In case of a breach of warranty . . . the insurer must assert its claim within the two-year period, whether the insured survives that period or not, either by affirmative action or by defense to a suit brought on the policy by the beneficiary within the two years.” To the same effect is the holding of the court in Ramsey v. Old Colony Life Insurance Co. decided by the supreme court of Illinois on April 21, 1921, and reported in 297 Ill., 592 , 131 N. E., 108 . | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Monahan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
neutral
1 sentence1923“After this policy shall have been in force [for a specified time] it shall become incontestable, except for nonpayment of premiums.” The identical question arose in the case of Monahan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., reported in 283 Ill., 136 , 119 N. E., 69 , L. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Lewis v. Turnley
neutral
2 sentences1923In support of this contention it cites the case of Lewis v. Turnley, 97 Tenn., 197 , 36 S. W., 872 . 1923In support of this contention it cites the case of Lewis v. Turnley, 97 Tenn., 197 , 36 S. W., 872 . | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. Smith
neutral
1 sentence1923This only means that it shall be incontestable for causes other than the nonpayment of premiums, but does not in anywise relieve the insured from the payment of his premiums, but, on the contrary, expressly stipulates that they shall be kept up and paid when due, during the twenty-years life oí the policy.” In the case of Jefferson Standard Life Insurance Co. v. Smith, supra, the incontestable clause contained in the policy sued on was as follows: “After this policy shall be in force for one full year from tlie date hereof it shall be incontestable for any cause except for nonpayment of premiu | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.