Provident Sav. Life Assur. Soc. of New York v. Loeb
| Decision Date | 13 June 1901 |
| Docket Number | 12,940. |
| Citation | 115 F. 357 |
| Parties | PROVIDENT SAV. LIFE ASSUR. SOC. OF NEW YORK v. LOEB et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana |
Farrar Jonas & Kruttschnitt, for complainant.
R. J Malone, for defendants McNamara.
S Wolff, for defendant Loeb.
The Provident Savings Life Assurance Society of New York filed its bill against Ernest M. Loeb and the widow and heirs of Robert McNamara.
Substantially the bill avers that the complainant issued and delivered to one Moses Schwartz its policy of life insurance, whereby it promised to pay to Schwartz, his executors, administrators or assigns, the sum of $10,000, less any indebtedness on account of the policy, within 90 days after acceptance by it of satisfactory proof of the death of McNamara; that McNamara died; that the proofs required by the policy were furnished, and the complainant has become indebted, because of said policy, to such person or persons as may, in accordance with the terms of the same, be entitled to be paid the same; that Loeb has furnished complainant due proofs of the death of McNamara, and claims the proceeds of the policy as the assignee of Schwartz, who was a creditor of McNamara, and in whose favor the policy has issued, as a creditor of McNamara; that due proofs of death have also been served upon complainant by a representative of the widow and heirs of the insured, McNamara, and said widow and heirs claim to be entitled to the proceeds of the policy, and have demanded of complainant payment of the same; that the adverse claims of Loeb and of the widow and heirs of the deceased are dependent upon, and derived from, the same common source; that complainant has and claims no interest in the subject matter of the contention, to wit, the amount due under the policy; that complainant has incurred no independent liability to any of said parties, and is perfectly indifferent between them, being in the position merely of a stakeholder; that the amount due under the policy is the sum of $10,000, less any indebtedness due on account of the policy, as per the agreement contained therein; that it is also provided in said policy, as per the agreement contained therein; that it is also provided in said policy that any unpaid quarterly or semiannual installment of the current year's premium will be deducted in any settlement of the policy; that the policy bears date of July 24, 1889, and that the premium for the year beginning July 24, 1900, became due July 24, 1900, but was payable, according to the terms of the policy semiannually. and that the semiannual premium due upon the policy on January 24, 1901, is, under the terms of the policy, to be deducted in any settlement of the same; that said semiannual installment, after deducting dividends due upon the same pursuant to the terms of the policy, is the sum of $337.50, which, deducted from the $10,000 aforesaid, leaves $9,662.50 as the full amount of principle due under the policy. That this amount, together with interest due thereon by complainant under the terms of the policy, makes an aggregate of $9,723.75, which complainant owes on the policy, and which aggregate amount the complainant has deposited in the registry of the court, to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State of Texas v. State of Florida
...which is decisive of the rights of all. Pacific National Bank v. Mixter, 124 U.S. 721, 8 S.Ct. 718, 31 L.Ed. 567; Provident Sav. Life Assur. Soc. v. Loeb, C.C., 115 F. 357; Sherman National Bank v. Shubert Theatrical Co., D.C., 238 F. 225, affirmed, 2 Cir., 247 F. 256; Illingworth v. Rowe, ......
-
John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Kegan
...Fleming v. Phoenix Assur. Co., 5 Cir., 40 F.2d 38, certiorari denied 282 U.S. 869, 51 S.Ct. 76, 75 L.Ed. 768; Provident Sav. Life Assur. Soc. v. Loeb, C.C., 115 F. 357, affirmed McNamara v. Provident Life Assur. Soc., 5 Cir., 114 F. 910; Marine Midland Co. v. Irving Trust Co., D.C., 56 F.2d......
-
Sherman Nat. Bank of New York v. Shubert Theatrical Co.
... ... (N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Dunlevy, 241 U.S. 518, 36 ... In ... Provident Savings Life Assur. Soc. v. Loeb (C.C.) ... 115 ... ...
-
General Electric Credit Corporation v. Grubbs
...of which is decisive of the rights of all. Pacific Nat. Bank v. Mixter, 124 U.S. 721, 8 S.Ct. 718, 31 L.Ed. 567; Provident Sav. Life Assur. Soc. v. Loeb, C. C., 115 F. 357; Sherman Nat. Bank v. Shubert Theatrical Co., D.C., 238 F. 225, affirmed, 2 Cir., 247 F. 256; Illingworth v. Rowe, 52 N......