Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

AETNA MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. v. CLOUGH a.

Under a policy of life insurance payable to the wife of the assured, or, if she dies first, to "their children," a child by his subsequent marriage takes nothing.

Per Curiam.[fn*] [fn*] See foot-note on page 22.

The title to the fund in question depends upon the construction of the contract contained in the policy. The natural meaning of the language used is not obscure or doubtful, and there is no evidence that the parties did not intend by the expression, "their children," the children of George and Eliza. Connecticut M. L. Ins. Co. v. Fish, 59 N.H. 126, 127; Lockwood v. Bishop, 51 How. Pr. 221. The assured's second marriage and the birth of another son had no effect upon the contract of insurance, and did not modify its meaning. The rights of the beneficiaries vested at the date of the policy, and could not be changed to their prejudice by any subsequent act of the assured, without their consent. Stokell v. Kimball, 59 N.H. 13; City Savings Bank v. Whittle, 63 N.H. 587.

Exception overruled.

BLODGETT, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

INSURANCE CO. v. CLOUGH
(Jun 1, 1895)