Stillwagoner v. Travelers Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the insurance company in particular may not raise beneficiary’s lack of insurable interest as defense
• holding that the insurance company in particular may not raise beneficiary’s lack, of insurable interest as defense
• tracing the origin of the doctrine to an English statute from the reign of King George III, which was received into the common law of Texas
• “The mere existence of an employer/employee relationship is never sufficient to give the employer an insurable interest in the life of the employee.”
• ''[A]lthough the Texas rule requires the designated beneficiary to have an insurable interest, it is not essential to the validity of the contract.''
• “[Although the Texas rule requires the designated beneficiary to have an insurable interest, it is not essential to the validity of the contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).