Robinson v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

Decision Date29 March 1904
Citation105 Mo. App. 567,80 S.W. 9
PartiesROBINSON v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; J. W. McElhinney, Judge.

Action by Emma W. Robinson against the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Nathan Frank and R. A. Jones, for appellant. Walther & Meunch, for respondent.

REYBURN, J.

The only question urged by appellant is the sufficiency of the statement of plaintiff's cause of action, as follows: "Plaintiff, for cause of action, states that defendant is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the state of New York, and doing business and having an office in the city of St. Louis, Missouri. Plaintiff further states that she was, up to the time of his death, the wife of one John F. Robinson; that defendant on the 15th day of November, 1901, in consideration of payment by said John F. Robinson to defendant of a premium of $22.21 semiannually during his life, and not to exceed 20 years, executed and delivered to said John F. Robinson its policy of insurance, in writing, whereby it insured his life in the sum of one thousand dollars for the benefit of plaintiff. The said policy is herewith filed, and marked `Exhibit A.' Plaintiff further states that said John F. Robinson died at the city of St. Louis on the 11th day of April, 1902, and up to the time of his death all the premiums accrued and due upon policy were duly paid, and that the said Robinson in all respects complied with the conditions and provisions of aforesaid policy; that plaintiff, immediately upon the death of said John F. Robinson, notified defendant of said fact, and did make proofs of death to defendant, in the manner and to the extent required, by blanks furnished by said defendant, which proofs were approved by defendant; that plaintiff has duly demanded from defendant payment of the sum of one thousand dollars, the amount of said policy, but the same has not been paid by defendant, nor has any part thereof been paid, and defendant is now justly indebted to plaintiff in said one thousand dollars, together with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Galloway v. Kansas City Rys. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 23, 1921
    ...the duty of using ordinary care to furnish a reasonably safe handhold. The court's theory is expressed on pages 603, 604 of the opinion (80 S. W. 9), wherein the court "`The present plaintiff was not a servant nor, yet, a passenger; but as regards the use of the handrail at an unusual place......
  • McCarty v. St. Louis & Suburban Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 29, 1904
  • McCarty v. St. Louis & S. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 29, 1904
  • McKinley v. Lawrence County Water Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 1909
    ... ... made after the trial is in progress. [Robinson v ... Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 105 Mo.App. 567, 80 S.W. 9; ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT