Baum v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

148 Misc. 322, 265 N.Y.S. 786, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1200
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 23, 1933·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Under the provisions of the policy the plaintiff is not precluded from recovering for disability resulting from disease by reason of the fact that he was confined in prison during the period of disability. We construe the policy as providing for compensation for the disability rather than for indemnity for loss of earnings (Suttles v. Railway Mail Association, 156 App. Div. 435), and we construe the provision of the policy that the disability must be such as to “ prevent him from performing any and every duty pertaining to his occupation ” as descriptive of the disease which shall entitle the plaintiff to disability payments.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

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

Baum v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States, 148 Misc. 322, 265 N.Y.S. 786, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1200 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

148 Misc. 322 (Baum v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related