ODOM ET AL.

v.

NEW YORK LIFE INS. CO.; AND ODOM ET AL. V. SAME

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. S. B. Penick & Co., 136 F.2d 413 (2d Cir. 1943)
  …ttles and their contents and that it was for the jury to decide how likely it was that some other substance had been substituted for what was originally put in the bottles. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Fox & London, 2 Cir., 93 F. 2d 669, certiorari denied 304 U.S. 566, 58 S.Ct. 949, 82 L.Ed. 1532; Hanify Co. v. Westberg, 9 Cir., 16 F. 2d 552. It is urged that there was evidence in the government’s case that the contents had been tampered with because each bottle was half filled in 1937 but contained a lesser amo…
• Louella Starling v. Gulf Life Ins. Co., 382 F.2d 701 (5th Cir. 1967)
  …er Georgia law, material misrepresentations contained in applications for reinstatement of policies are regarded in the same way as those made in original applications. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Odom, 5th Cir. 1937, 93 F. 2d 641, cert. denied, 1938, 304 U.S. 566, 58 S.Ct. 948, 82 L.Ed. 1532; Life & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Davis, 1940, 62 Ga.App. 832, 10 S.E. 2d 129; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Hollis, 1933, 177 Ga. 805, 171 S.E. 288; Phillips v. New York Life Ins. Co., 1931, 173 Ga. 135, 159 S.E. 696. Thus, insi…