[T][U] Miller v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co. [T][U] Miller v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co.

[T][U] Miller v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co‪.‬

95 F.3d 1158, 1996.C09.41369

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

MEMORANDUM* Appellant Erma Miller appeals a grant of summary judgment by the district court in favor of the defendants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Miller challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment for the defendants on the question of proof of loss. Miller contends that additional proof of loss was not required once the disability was established. Miller's claim lacks merit. Under the terms of the policy the insurer can require continuing proof of loss. Also, California law establishes that disability insurers can make reasonable requests for proof of continuing disability. Erreca v. Western States Life Ins. Co., 19 Cal. 2d 388, 121 P.2d 689 (Cal. 1942). In addition, neither Miller nor Stites responded to Provident's numerous requests for proof of disability by taking the position that Provident was not entitled to request them, but rather submitted incomplete and inadequate materials. Because the record fails to indicate that Miller submitted adequate proof of continuing disability, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendants.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1996
28 August
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
2
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
65.2
KB

More Books by Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals

United States v. Boone United States v. Boone
2000
[T][U] Hartman v. Mccarthy [T][U] Hartman v. Mccarthy
1996
[T][U] Butcher v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. [T][U] Butcher v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.
1996
[T][U] Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Castetter [T][U] Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Castetter
1996
[U] Haskins v. Farmers Home Administration [U] Haskins v. Farmers Home Administration
1996
[T][U] Likes v. Babbitt [T][U] Likes v. Babbitt
1996