Posner v. Travelers Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Posner v. Travelers Insurance

252 A.D. 877, 300 N.Y.S. 1342, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6650

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D. 877 (Posner v. Travelers Insurance) 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

Posner v. Travelers Insurance, 252 A.D. 877, 300 N.Y.S. 1342, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6650 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover on two insurance policies containing total disability provisions. The question involved was: What constitutes total disability? Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Judgment reversed on the law, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs, upon the ground that the evidence is not sufficient to establish such a total and permanent disability as is contemplated by the policies which are the bases of plaintiff’s action. (Waldman v. Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, ante, p. 448.) Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Davis and Close, JJ., concur for reversal but dissent from the dismissal of the complaint and vote for a new trial upon the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence.

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

Action to recover on two insurance policies containing total disability provisions. The question involved was: What constitutes total disability? Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Judgment reversed on the law, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs, upon the ground that the evidence is not sufficient to establish such a total and permanent disability as is contemplated by the policies which are the bases of plaintiff’s action. (Waldman v. Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, ante, p. 448.) Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Davis and Close, JJ., concur for reversal but dissent from the dismissal of the complaint and vote for a new trial upon the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D. 877, 300 N.Y.S. 1342, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/posner-v-travelers-insurance-nyappdiv-1937.