Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

FISCHMAN v. BENEFIT ASSOCIATION RAILWAY EMPLOYEES. (11/28/62)

November 28, 1962

FISCHMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
BENEFIT ASSOCIATION OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES.



Appeals, Nos. 85, 86 and 141, March T., 1962, from orders of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1957, No. 3078, July T., 1960, Nos. 2339 and 2338, in cases of Ruth Fischman v. Benefit Association of Railway Employees, Selma S. Freedman v. Same, Royal Bedding Company, Inc. v. Same and L. E. Wolk. Orders affirmed; reargument refused January 8, 1963.

COUNSEL

Samuel J. Goldstein, for appellants.

James B. Hecht, with him Thorp, Reed & Armstrong, for appellee.

Before Bell, C.j., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen and Keim, JJ.

Author: Keim

[ 409 Pa. Page 365]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE KEIM

This case involves three appeals from orders of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, wherein defendant's preliminary objections in the nature of demurrer were sustained and the complaints dismissed.

The case involves assumpsit actions in which plaintiffs, as named beneficiaries in alleged life insurance contracts with the defendant company, seek to recover the amounts of the policy upon the death of the persons insured.

It appears all of the applicants were members of the Furniture Club of Pittsburgh (hereinafter referred to as Club), a trade association, formed under the Nonprofit Corporation Law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and composed of individuals who were representatives of furniture manufacturers, retail furniture dealers and their executive officers, and department store furniture executives.

The Club delivered a master application and data sheets to the defendant, said master application being executed by the President of the Club, L. E. Wolk, who was an insurance broker, and F. Cherne, signing for himself and his associate Rosol, the representative of defendant insurance company.

It is argued by the appellants that the appellees agreed with the Club that a group insurance contract, conforming with and subject to the master application

[ 409 Pa. Page 366]

    and data sheets would be issued, provided 75% of the total membership of the Club made individual applications for coverage. The individual applications were to be in writing, signed by the applicant, and were to contain the following information: "Name of Employee", "Date of Birth of Employee", "Date Employed", "Sex", "Race", "Insurance Class", "Beneficiary", "Address of Beneficiary", "Name of Employer" (in all cards the name "The Furniture Club of Pittsburgh, Inc." was typed in this blank), "Date Card is signed", and "Signature ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.