Clifford v. Prudential Ins.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Clifford v. Prudential Ins.

28 A. 1085, 161 Pa. 257, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 681

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 23, 1894

DocketAppeal, No. 295

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 28 A. 1085 (Clifford v. Prudential Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clifford v. Prudential Ins., 28 A. 1085, 161 Pa. 257, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 681 (Pa. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Thomas Anderson obtained insurance upon his own life in the company defendant in 1890. In 1891 he transferred his policies to Anthony J. Clifford as collateral security for certain debts due by him to Clifford. A few months later Anderson died. Letters of administration upon his estate were obtained by Clifford, his creditor, who thereupon brought this suit. The defence taken is that Clifford holds these policies as the assignee of the decedent and not as his administrator, and for this reason we are asked to overturn the judgment.

The court below had, as we now have, ample power to allow such amendment as may be necessary to protect the defendant from further liability on this policy. We are by no means sure that any amendment is needed, but as the plaintiff asks to be allowed to describe himself as also the assignee of Anderson, and as such amendment will remove any possible objection to the judgment, we will allow the amendment and affirm the judgment.

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

Per Curiam,

Thomas Anderson obtained insurance upon his own life in the company defendant in 1890. In 1891 he transferred his policies to Anthony J. Clifford as collateral security for certain debts due by him to Clifford. A few months later Anderson died. Letters of administration upon his estate were obtained by Clifford, his creditor, who thereupon brought this suit. The defence taken is that Clifford holds these policies as the assignee of the decedent and not as his administrator, and for this reason we are asked to overturn the judgment.

The court below had, as we now have, ample power to allow such amendment as may be necessary to protect the defendant from further liability on this policy. We are by no means sure that any amendment is needed, but as the plaintiff asks to be allowed to describe himself as also the assignee of Anderson, and as such amendment will remove any possible objection to the judgment, we will allow the amendment and affirm the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A. 1085, 161 Pa. 257, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clifford-v-prudential-ins-pa-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack