# Maryland Casualty Co. v. Massey

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · April 15, 1930 · 38 F.2d 724

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9650980

## Case

- **Full name:** Maryland Casualty Co. v. Massey
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 15, 1930
- **Citations:** 38 F.2d 724; 71 A.L.R. 1428; 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2383
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Hickenlooper, Moorman, Hicken-Looper, Simons
- **Cited by:** 24 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9650980

## Opinion text

On Petitions for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s petition is directed to a reconsideration of the opinion of the court holding the death due to accidental means. Nothing substantial is presented that was not fully considered upon the original hearing, and we think the petition should be denied. The appellee’s petition calls attention to a fact not brought to notice of either this or the District Court, namely, that the last day of the period within which the beneficiary was required to furnish proofs of loss was May 30th, which under the statutes of the United States and the laws of Tennessee is a legal holiday. This may aid appellee, who mailed proofs of loss on the ninety-first day, only if circumstances in connection with the furnishing of forms for proofs of loss through the general agent are such as to raise the issue whether or not they were to be returned the same way, and if they were, from what was stated in the claimed telephone conversation, whether the mailing of the proofs may be regarded as the delivery of them to the general, agent as of that day. No such issues are presented by the present reeord. We think that in so far as appellee’s petition asks that reversal be set aside and an order of affirmance entered, it should be denied; but that in view of the new matter presented, the cause should be remanded to the District Court for a new trial, at which it is expected tte evidence will more fully cover these issues and also show the contents of the letter serving as notice of loss, so that a correct decision may be arrived at in the light of our comment upon that subject.
Reversed and remanded for new trial.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9650980. Public record. Not legal advice.