People v. Knickerbocker Life Insurance
Opinion
The respondent contends that the appeal from the order of April twenty-eighth should be dismissed as not appealable. [504] A motion was made to dismiss this appeal on the same ground in June last and denied. (197 App. Div. 933.) The contention of the respondent in this regard requires no further comment.
The petitioner, administrator of an estate of a beneficiary of a life insurance policy in the Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company, applied to the court for the appointment of a receiver of said company, successor to one discharged by an order of December 23, 1887, reinstated in 1906, and his estate discharged after his executor had accounted. The assets of the company are now in possession of the State Superintendent of Insurance, where they have been for many years, who has paid out of the funds in his possession dividends to those claimants who had filed their claims with the receiver, and certain legal expenses incurred in the administration of the insolvent estate.
The petitioner does not show that any demand for payment of this claim was ever made upon the Superintendent and refused.
The Superintendent of Insurance since the enactment of section 63 of the Insurance Law
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
199 A.D. 503 (People v. Knickerbocker Life Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.