Carlin v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

New York Court of Appeals

Carlin v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

423 N.E.2d 403, 53 N.Y.2d 931, 440 N.Y.S.2d 926, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2489

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 14, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 423 N.E.2d 403 (Carlin v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carlin v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States, 423 N.E.2d 403, 53 N.Y.2d 931, 440 N.Y.S.2d 926, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2489 (N.Y. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment appealed from and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review should be reversed, with costs, and defendant Equitable’s motion for partial summary judgment denied.

Under the terms of this life insurance policy, “the Owner may obtain an advance from the Society” (emphasis added). The plain meaning of this language, as well as relevant case law, leads us to the conclusion that such moneys are [933]*933“merely a deduction in account from the sum that the [insurer] ultimately must pay” (Matter of Hayes, 252 NY 148, 154; emphasis added). Since payment is not due until after the death of the insured, a beneficiary cannot properly sue for the proceeds to be received under the policy until the time for performance has arrived (see Kelly v Security Mut. Life Ins. Co., 186 NY 16, 19). Plaintiff’s suit for the proceeds having been commenced within six years of her husband’s death, it was not barred by the Statute of Limitations (CPLR 213).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Judgment appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review reversed, etc.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment appealed from and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review should be reversed, with costs, and defendant Equitable’s motion for partial summary judgment denied.

Under the terms of this life insurance policy, “the Owner may obtain an advance from the Society” (emphasis added). The plain meaning of this language, as well as relevant case law, leads us to the conclusion that such moneys are [933]*933“merely a deduction in account from the sum that the [insurer] ultimately must pay” (Matter of Hayes, 252 NY 148, 154; emphasis added). Since payment is not due until after the death of the insured, a beneficiary cannot properly sue for the proceeds to be received under the policy until the time for performance has arrived (see Kelly v Security Mut. Life Ins. Co., 186 NY 16, 19). Plaintiff’s suit for the proceeds having been commenced within six years of her husband’s death, it was not barred by the Statute of Limitations (CPLR 213).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Judgment appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

423 N.E.2d 403, 53 N.Y.2d 931, 440 N.Y.S.2d 926, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlin-v-equitable-life-assurance-society-of-united-states-ny-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack