McBride v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 03 December 1935 |
| Docket Number | 2596,No. 2594,2597.,2594 |
| Citation | 14 F. Supp. 240 |
| Parties | McBRIDE v. CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INS. CO. HALL v. SAME. JONES v. SAME. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana |
J. B. Crow and O. W. Bullock, both of Shreveport, La., for plaintiffs.
E. W. & P. N. Browne, of Shreveport, La., for defendant.
In each of the above suits plaintiffs sue upon a policy of group insurance, alleging that the same was issued to the "Gulf Oil Corporation of Pennsylvania, and its subsidiary companies, which said policy was delivered to the said Gulf Oil Corporation of Pennsylvania and its subsidiaries." In addition to claiming the face amounts of the certificates issued to the plaintiffs, they demand certain penalties under Act No. 310 of the Louisiana Legislature of 1910, including "double the amount due under the terms of said policy and said certificate, together with reasonable attorneys' fees, to be determined by the court."
Defendant has moved to strike out the demands for penalties on the ground that there is nothing in the petition to show that the master policy was a Louisiana contract or was made to have effect in this state. Plaintiffs allege that the said policy is in the hands of the Gulf Oil Corporation of Pennsylvania or its subsidiaries; that they were and are employees of the Gulf Refining Company of Louisiana, a Louisiana corporation, subsidiary, but nowhere does it appear in the petition that the policy contract was made in Louisiana, or to have effect here, in so far as its provisions between the contracting parties, the insured and the insurer, are concerned. The certificates issued to these plaintiffs do not constitute the contracts. Austin v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (La.App.) 142 So. 337. The issuance of a certificate to a citizen of this state did not make the policy a Louisiana contract. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company v. Speer, 185 Ark. 615, 48 S.W.(2d) 553. The Louisiana statute cannot have any extraterritorial effect.
My conclusion is that the petition fails to allege facts which bring the policy under the provisions of the Louisiana law, and the motions to strike should be sustained.
Proper decree should be presented.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Elaine Aghaeepour, Ashley Glasgow, Julie Higgins, Shane Moore, Michele Norris, Jesus Rivera, Schilco, Inc. v. N. Leasing Sys., Inc.
-
Boseman v. Connecticut General Life Ins Co
...Co. v. Lewis (La.App.) 142 So. 721, 722; Hardie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (Mo.App.) 7 S.W.(2d) 746, 747; McBride v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co. (D.C.) 14 F.Supp. 240, 241. 5 Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Moore, 75 S.W.(2d) 329; Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Dent, 84 S.W......
-
Protective Life Ins. Co. v. Lamarque
... ... McGifford ... v. Protective Life Ins. Co., 151 So. 349; McBride v ... Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co., 14 F.Supp. 240 ... The ... lower court erred in ... of the appellee's disability ... Boseman ... v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co., 84 F.2d 701, 57 S.Ct ... 686; Hartford Acc. & Ind. Co. v. Delta & Pine ... ...
-
Bynum v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America
...Ins. Co. v. Boseman, 5 Cir., 84 F.2d 701, affirmed 301 U.S. 196, 57 S.Ct. 686, 81 L.Ed. 1036, 110 A.L.R. 732; McBride v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co., D.C., 14 F.Supp. 240. In this case, however, it is immaterial whether the contracts are to be construed and governed by the laws of the......