Mahalek v. Merchants Reserve Life Insurance

Appellate Court of Illinois

Mahalek v. Merchants Reserve Life Insurance

205 Ill. App. 334

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 16, 1917

DocketGen. No. 22,788

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 205 Ill. App. 334 (Mahalek v. Merchants Reserve Life Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mahalek v. Merchants Reserve Life Insurance, 205 Ill. App. 334 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Insurance, § 659*—when evidence is sufficient to show truth of statements in application. Evidence in an action on a life insurance policy, held to warrant finding that the insured's statements in his application for life insurance as to his health were true and not false. 5. Insurance, § 663*—what is not evidence of Knowledge of falsity of statements by insured in application. A coroner’s finding on autopsy that an insured’s death was due to organic heart disease, held not to he evidence tending to prove that the insured consciously departed from .the truth when he represented in his application for life insurance that he did not suffer from heart disease1, in an action to recover on a life insurance policy.

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

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Insurance, § 659*—when evidence is sufficient to show truth of statements in application. Evidence in an action on a life insurance policy, held to warrant finding that the insured's statements in his application for life insurance as to his health were true and not false. 5. Insurance, § 663*—what is not evidence of Knowledge of falsity of statements by insured in application. A coroner’s finding on autopsy that an insured’s death was due to organic heart disease, held not to he evidence tending to prove that the insured consciously departed from .the truth when he represented in his application for life insurance that he did not suffer from heart disease1, in an action to recover on a life insurance policy.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 Ill. App. 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mahalek-v-merchants-reserve-life-insurance-illappct-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack