Mutual Life Ins. v. Haynes

Sixth Circuit

Mutual Life Ins. v. Haynes

149 F.2d 483, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2610

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMay 24, 1945

DocketNo. 9972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 149 F.2d 483 (Mutual Life Ins. v. Haynes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mutual Life Ins. v. Haynes, 149 F.2d 483, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2610 (6th Cir. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

It appearing that the cause of the death of the insured under the life and accident insurance policy involved in this case is a question of medical science, and as the expert medical testimony in the record based on evidential facts is conflicting as to whether the insured’s death was caused primarily by his infirmities and, without their presence, death would not have occurred, or was caused primarily by a fall, the issue was one for the jury, and wherefore the only error assigned is the failure of the trial court to direct a verdict, the judgment is affirmed. Bridge v. Metropolitan L. Insurance Company, 142 Ohio St. 521, 53 N.E.2d 350; Painesville Utopia Theatre Company v. Lautermilch, 118 Ohio St. 167, 160 N.E. 683; United States Casualty Co. v. Thrush, 21 Ohio App. 129, 152 N.E. 796.

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

PER CURIAM.

It appearing that the cause of the death of the insured under the life and accident insurance policy involved in this case is a question of medical science, and as the expert medical testimony in the record based on evidential facts is conflicting as to whether the insured’s death was caused primarily by his infirmities and, without their presence, death would not have occurred, or was caused primarily by a fall, the issue was one for the jury, and wherefore the only error assigned is the failure of the trial court to direct a verdict, the judgment is affirmed. Bridge v. Metropolitan L. Insurance Company, 142 Ohio St. 521, 53 N.E.2d 350; Painesville Utopia Theatre Company v. Lautermilch, 118 Ohio St. 167, 160 N.E. 683; United States Casualty Co. v. Thrush, 21 Ohio App. 129, 152 N.E. 796.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 F.2d 483, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mutual-life-ins-v-haynes-ca6-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack