Chase v. William Penn Life Insurance
565 N.E.2d 1265, 76 N.Y.2d 999, 564 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1990 N.Y. LEXIS 4431
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs. There being support in the record, this Court may not disturb the affirmed finding of fact that decedent made no material misrepresentation in his application for insurance. It is therefore unnecessary to reach the issue of the trial court’s evidentiary rulings pertaining to the separate question of defendant’s reliance on the alleged misrepresentations.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Chase v. William Penn Life Insurance, 565 N.E.2d 1265, 76 N.Y.2d 999, 564 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1990 N.Y. LEXIS 4431 (N.Y. 1990).
565 N.E.2d 1265 (Chase v. William Penn Life Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Douglas v. PROTECTIVE LIFE AND ANNUITY INS. CO.
689 F. Supp. 2d 628 (S.D. New York, 2010)
Falcon Crest Diamonds, Inc. v. Dixon
173 Misc. 2d 450 (New York Supreme Court, 1996)
Fratello v. Savings Banks Life Insurance Fund
186 A.D.2d 1061 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)