FAY KELLEY, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JULIAN S. KELLEY, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA AND GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 1969-02-05
No. 68-4
LILES, C. J., and PIERCE and MANN, JJ., concur.
224 So. 2d 435 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1969) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the summary judgment in favor of the insurance company was correct because there was no evidence the insured knew of his illness when applying.


Facts & Procedural History

The deceased purchased a credit life insurance policy and later died of cancer. The insurance company refused to pay, citing the policy's good health …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the Civil and Criminal Court of Record for Pinellas County, Florida. Plaintiff, appellant here, was the wife of the deceased, Julian S. Kelley, who had purchased a credit life insurance policy in July of 1965, which policy contained the following language:

“I, the undersigned debtor, proposed for such insurance, in order to induce Prudential to effect such insurance, do hereby declare that to the best of my knowledge and belief, I am now in good health.”

On January 27, 1966, appellant’s husband died of cancer while still owing General Motors Acceptance Corporation $3,311.71. Appellee, Prudential Insurance Company, refused to pay and suit was brought. After taking many depositions the court granted a summary judgment in favor of Prudential.

We have read the briefs and the depositions of the doctors and others taken in this cause, and have heard oral argument. We can find no reason to believe that the plaintiff’s husband did not know of his bad health at the time he signed the application for the insurance policy.

For these reasons the entry of the summary judgment in favor of Prudential Insurance Company was correct.

Affirmed.

LILES, C. J., and PIERCE and MANN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Minn. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Candelore, 416 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
    …v. Blue Cross of Florida, Inc., 277 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (trial judge, who had previously reserved ruling, directed verdict for insurance company after jury verdict for insured, affirmed on appeal); Kelly v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 224 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (summary judgment for insurer affirmed).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw