ROSENTHAL
v.
NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE CO.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
New York Life Insurance Company sought to cancel two policy reinstatements on grounds of fraud, and the Circuit Court of Appeals decided the case by applying general law principles regarding the incontestable clause and premium anniversary dates. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case, holding that questions concerning the interpretation of an insurance policy are matters of state law that must be decided according to the decisions of the relevant state court, not federal general law principles.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
Respondent, New York Life Insurance Company, brought this suit to cancel two reinstatements of an insurance policy upon the ground that they were fraudulently procured. The Circuit Court of Appeals, affirming with modification a decree of the District Court, held that the agreement by which a lapsed policy is reinstated is a new agreement, as regards the effect of the incontestable clause in the policy, and that clause runs from the date of the reinstatement where the defense is fraud in its procurement; and, further, that the extended insurance under the policy in question was to be calculated from the anniversary date of the issue of the policy and not from the anniversary date of the payment of the first premium. 94 F. 2d 675. The District Court found that the policy was issued upon the joint lives of residents of Missouri and was applied for and delivered to the insured in that State. The Circuit Court of Appeals decided the questions, as above stated, as matters of general law according to the view of the court as to the weight of authority. Petitioner sought a rehearing upon the ground, among others, that the interpretation of the policy was governed by the law of Missouri. Rehearing was denied.
While respondent contends that the decision below is not in conflict with the local law, it is not necessary for us to determine that question. It is enough to say that the questions to be decided are those of state law and should have been determined according to the. decisions of the state court. Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, ante, p. 64; Ruhlin v. New York Life Insurance Co., ante, p. 202.
Certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals is vacated, and the cause is remanded to that court for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
Judgment vacated.
Mr. Justice Cardozo took no part in the consideration and decision of this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (24 total)
-
Salve Regina Coll. v. Russell, 499 U.S. 225 (U.S. 1991)…ead of the law of the respective States, and remanded to the Courts of Appeals for consideration of the applicable principles of state law. See, e. g., New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson, 304 U. S. 261 (1938), and Rosenthal v. New York Life Ins. Co., 304 U. S. 263 (1938). It is true that in Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, 350 U. S. 198 (1956), [*235] this Court remanded the case to the District Court for application of state law. The Court noted, however, that the law of the State was firmly settled,…
-
Huddleston v. Dwyer, 322 U.S. 232 (U.S. 1944)…i Court will not ordinarily decide them without that aid where they may conveniently first be decided by the court whose judgment we are called upon to review. See, e. g., Ruhlin v. New York Life Ins. Co., supra; Rosenthal v. New York Life Ins. Co., 304 U. S. 263, 264; West v. A. T. & T. Co., 311 U. S. 223, 241; Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Co., 313 U. S. 487, 497; Meredith v. Winter Haven, supra. Accordingly, without passing on any of the other contentions of the parties, we vacate the judgment below and remand t…
-
Black & Yates, Inc. v. Mahogany Ass'n, Inc., 129 F.2d 227 (3d Cir. 1941)…iple of Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, supra. See Ruhlin v. New York Life Ins. Co., 304 U.S. 202, 205, 58 S.Ct. 860, 82 L.Ed. 1290; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson, 304 U.S. 261, 58 S.Ct. 871, 82 L.Ed. 1329, and Rosenthal v. New York Life Insurance Co., 304 U.S. 263, 58 S.Ct. 874, 82 L.Ed. 1330. Nothing contained in Russell v. Todd, 309 U.S. 280, 60 S.Ct. 527, 84 L.Ed. 754, or in West v. American T. & T. Co., 311 U.S. 223, 61 S.Ct. 179, 85 L.Ed. 139, 132 A.L.R. 956, indicates the contrary. There is no doubt t…
Previewing 3 of 24 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rosenthal v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co., 94 F.2d 675 (8th Cir. 1938)