Cates v. Bankers Health & Life Insurance
107 S.E. 615, 27 Ga. App. 159, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 747
Opinion
An administratrix cannot maintain a suit on an insurance policy upon the life of her intestate, where the policy names a beneficiary. Accordingly, in this case, the policy not being payable to the decedent’s estate, it was not error for the court to dismiss the action. See, in this connection, Cason v. Owens, 100 Ga. 142 (28 S. E. 75), and Perry v. Tweedy, 128 Ga. 402 (57 S. E. 782, 119 Am. St. R. 393, 11 Ann. Cas. 46).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cates v. Bankers Health & Life Insurance, 107 S.E. 615, 27 Ga. App. 159, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 747 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).
107 S.E. 615 (Cates v. Bankers Health & Life Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wages v. Wages
42 S.E.2d 481 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Chapman v. Lipscomb-Ellis Co.
22 S.E.2d 393 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Saville v. Lee
158 S.E. 441 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)