Cordover v. Cordover

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cordover v. Cordover

258 A.D. 1056, 17 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8878

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 5, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D. 1056 (Cordover v. Cordover) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cordover v. Cordover, 258 A.D. 1056, 17 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8878 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff sues to recover the proceeds of three life insurance policies issued upon the life of her husband. The appellant — deceased’s mother — was named as beneficiary in each policy. The policies provided that the insured might change the named beneficiary. Plaintiff claimed the policies were given and assigned to her by the insured, and a verdict was rendered in her favor. Order and judgment entered thereon affirmed, with costs. The error, if any, in the rulings of the trial court may be disregarded as harmless. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 106.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Close, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and judgment and to grant a new trial, with the following memorandum: Under the facts in this case, wherein the veracity of the plaintiff was the determining factor, it was reversible error to exclude the complaint and reply in the action brought by the plaintiff against the Travelers Insurance Company, especially when the answer of the insurance company was admitted over appellant’s objection.

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

Plaintiff sues to recover the proceeds of three life insurance policies issued upon the life of her husband. The appellant — deceased’s mother — was named as beneficiary in each policy. The policies provided that the insured might change the named beneficiary. Plaintiff claimed the policies were given and assigned to her by the insured, and a verdict was rendered in her favor. Order and judgment entered thereon affirmed, with costs. The error, if any, in the rulings of the trial court may be disregarded as harmless. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 106.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Close, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and judgment and to grant a new trial, with the following memorandum: Under the facts in this case, wherein the veracity of the plaintiff was the determining factor, it was reversible error to exclude the complaint and reply in the action brought by the plaintiff against the Travelers Insurance Company, especially when the answer of the insurance company was admitted over appellant’s objection.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 1056, 17 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cordover-v-cordover-nyappdiv-1940.