Hatten v. Prudence Mutual Benefit Ass'n

186 S.E. 693, 53 Ga. App. 586, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 326
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 30, 1936
Docket25385
StatusPublished

This text of 186 S.E. 693 (Hatten v. Prudence Mutual Benefit Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hatten v. Prudence Mutual Benefit Ass'n, 186 S.E. 693, 53 Ga. App. 586, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 326 (Ga. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

MacIntyre, J.

A policy of life insurance in which the applicant is named as the beneficiary, and the insured is named as the son of the applicant, will not be enforced where it appears from the petition bringing suit thereon that the deceased insured was not a son but an adult grandson of the husband of the plaintiff, her marriage having occurred in 1930. Such a misrepresentation was so material as to avoid the policy, even if there was any “insurable interest” for the benefit of plaintiff in such step-grandson. The court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the petition. Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Guerry, J., eonour.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 S.E. 693, 53 Ga. App. 586, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatten-v-prudence-mutual-benefit-assn-gactapp-1936.