Barfield v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance

186 S.E. 735, 182 Ga. 704, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 547
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 10, 1936
DocketNo. 11074
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 186 S.E. 735 (Barfield v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barfield v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance, 186 S.E. 735, 182 Ga. 704, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 547 (Ga. 1936).

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

It appearing from the allegations in the petition, construed most strongly against the pleader, that a claim is being made for indemnity that has accrued under the policy in which the insurer may defend, the petitioner has an adequate remedy at law; and consequently equity will not entertain jurisdiction to cancel the contract on the ground of the alleged fraud in the procurement. Enelow v. New York Life Insurance Co., 293 U. S. 379 (55 Sup. Ct. 310, 79 L. ed. 440).

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Harold Hirsch, Marion Smilh, W. B. Cody, and B. L. Cody, for plaintiff in error. Bryan, Middlebroolcs & Darter, contra.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

National Life & Accident Insurance v. Preston
22 S.E.2d 157 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Lockett v. National Life & Accident Insurance
18 S.E.2d 550 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. Childs
7 S.E.2d 907 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 S.E. 735, 182 Ga. 704, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barfield-v-pacific-mutual-life-insurance-ga-1936.