From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Radway v. United Benefit Life Insurance Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1956
1 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 1956)

Opinion

May 22, 1956


Order granting plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissing defendant's counterclaim and the judgment entered thereon, unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellant, and the motion denied. The incontestability clause is no bar to the counterclaim insofar as it seeks to reform, rather than to destroy, the policy. The allegations of defendant's mistake in computing the premium chargeable for the insurance, coupled with allegations that plaintiff "knew or should have known" that the premium set forth in the policy was incorrect, create triable issues, if not as to mutual mistake, then certainly as to unilateral mistake on one side and fraud on the other.

Concur — Peck, P.J., Breitel, Botein, Frank and Valente, JJ.


Summaries of

Radway v. United Benefit Life Insurance Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1956
1 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 1956)
Case details for

Radway v. United Benefit Life Insurance Co.

Case Details

Full title:FRED S. RADWAY, Respondent, v. UNITED BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 22, 1956

Citations

1 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 1956)

Citing Cases

Spear v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America

The first three counterclaims alleged that Mrs. Spear made false representations in the application, and, as…

Menado Corp. v. Indemnity Ins. Co.

Plaintiff previously moved for summary judgment before the undersigned. The motion was denied upon the ground…