Lewis v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 February 1901 |
| Citation | 178 Mass. 52,59 N.E. 439 |
| Parties | LEWIS v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
E. H. Savary, for plaintiff.
W. M. Butler and Guy W. Cox, for defendant.
The plaintiff had no rights under the policy sued on by him. The insured was his mother, Esther Lewis. The promise sought to be enforced in this action was a promise 'to pay * * * the amount stipulated in the schedule below,' without naming any one as the person to whom the payment was to be made. Under the clause authorizing the company to pay this sum to 'any relative by blood or connection by marriage of the insured, or to any other person appearing to said company to be equitably entitled to the same by reason of having incurred expense on behalf of the insurced, or for his or her burial,' a payment to the plaintiff might perhaps have been a discharge of the contract (Insurance Co. v. Schaffer, 50 N. J. Law, 72, 11 A. 154); but that clause does not entitle one to whom such a payment might have been made, but who is not named as the beneficiary of the policy, or otherwise designated as the person who is to receive the sum to be paid, to enforce payment of the sum due under it. Such a suit can be maintained only by the executor or administrator of the insured with whom the contract was made. McCarthy v. Insurance Co., 162 Mass. 254, 38 N.E. 435. Neither does the fact, testified to by the plaintiff, that he 'paid the premiums between the time of the issue of the policy and her death,' give the plaintiff a right to sue for the amount to be paid. The premiums, being paid under the policy, are, in legal contemplation, paid by the insured. Swan v. Snow, 11 Allen, 224, 226; Millard v. Brayton, 59 N.E. 436. Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clarkston v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
... ... made therein were erroneous, or were given through mistake ... Almond v. Modern Woodmen of America, 133 Mo.App ... 382; Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. v. Newton, 22 ... Wall. (U.S.) 32; Hassencamp v. Life Ins. Co., 120 F ... 475; Hanna v. Life Ins. Co., 44 N.E. 1099; ... Walther v. Ins ... obligate the insurer to pay the policy to any one other than ... the named beneficiary. Lewis v. Metropolitan Life Ins ... Co., 178 Mass. 52, 59 N.E. 439; Wolkal v ... Belsky, 65 N.Y.S. 815; Ferretti v. Prudential Ins ... Co., 97 N.Y.S ... ...
-
Kelly v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America
... ... Kelly, had no ... insurable interest in the life of the insured, and hence, the ... assignment to her was invalid ... Ind. 463; Susquehanna v. Swank, 102 Pa. St. 17; ... Metropolitan v. Shafer, 50 N. J. Law 72 (11 A. 154); ... Metropolitan v. O'Farrer ... (Prosecutor) v. Shaeffer, 50 N. J. Law 72, 11 A. 154 ... (8087); Lewis v. Metropolitan (Mass. 1901), 59 N.E ... 439; McNalley v. Metropolitan ... may assist the court. Ashford v. Ins. Co., 80 ... Mo.App. 641; Van Cleave v. Union Casualty Co., 82 ... ...
-
Howell v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Boston
...v. Metropolitan Ins. Co., Mo.App., 233 S.W. 248;Heubner v. Metropolitan Ins. Co., 146 IllApp. 282;Lewis v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co., 178 Mass. 52, 59 N.E. 439,86 Am.St.Rep. 463. If ambiguity exists, the contracts must be construed in manner most favorable to the insured. Killian v. Metropol......
-
Shea v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
... ... See ... G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 175, §§ 24, 134, cl. 2; Beecey v ... Travelers' Ins. Co., 267 Mass. 135, 138, 166 N.E ... 571; Duval v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 82 N.H ... 543, 550, 136 A. 400, 50 A.L.R. 1276; Smithart v. John ... Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co., 167 Tenn. 513, 527, ... of the company. See Millard v. Brayton, 177 Mass ... 533, 59 N.E. 436,52 L.R.A. 117, 83 Am.St.Rep. 294; Lewis ... v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 178 Mass. 52, 54, 59 N.E ... 439,86 Am.St.Rep. 463; see, also, Palmer Savings Bank v ... Insurance Co. of ... ...