Bomberger v. United Brethren Mutual Aid Society

6 A. 41, 3 Sadler 293
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 4, 1886·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam :

There was no error in holding that the plaintiff was not en[296] titled to recover.- The defendant paid the money according to the terms of its contract, and to the person named in the certificate of membership. The company did not agree to pay the amount of the insurance to the estate of the person on whose life the risk was taken; nor did the plaintiff, as executrix, notify the company not to pay the money to the beneficiary.mentioned in the certificate. There was no contract with -the widow and heirs, and no right of action or legal capacity existed in them, as such, to collect the money or to forbid its payment to the beneficiary.

Judgment affirmed.-

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

Bomberger v. United Brethren Mutual Aid Society, 6 A. 41, 3 Sadler 293 (Pa. 1886).

6 A. 41 (Bomberger v. United Brethren Mutual Aid Society) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burton's Estate
20 Pa. D. & C. 566 (Philadelphia County Orphans' Court, 1934)
Gould v. United Traction Employees Mutual Aid Ass'n
58 A. 624 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1904)