Case Name: Marjorie F. Reinberg, Appellant, v. New York Life Insurance Company, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-02-27
Citations: 235 N.Y. 544
Docket Number: 
Parties: Marjorie F. Reinberg, Appellant, v. New York Life Insurance Company, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 235
Pages: 544–545

Head Matter:
Marjorie F. Reinberg, Appellant, v. New York Life Insurance Company, Respondent.
Insurance — provision in policy of life insurance for double insurance in event of death from accident while riding as passenger on train —• insured killed while attempting to board passenger train — beneficiary may not recover double indemnity.
Reinberg v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co., 201 App. Div. 858, affirmed.
(Argued January 25, 1923;
decided February 27, 1923.)
Appeal from a judgment, entered April 29, 1922, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term, a jury having been waived, and directing a dismissal of the complaint. The action was to recover upon a policy of life insurance. The policy provided for the payment of the face thereof upon receipt of due proof of the insured’s death, or double its face upon receipt of due proof that such death was caused “ directly by accident while traveling as a passenger on a * * * railway train * * * or other public conveyance operated by a common carrier.” The insured, while attempting to board a passenger train of the New York Central railroad as it was moving out of the Tarrytown station, grasped the handrail or grab bar at the side of the car steps and after running for some distance along the platform, but without getting either foot on the steps, lost his hold, fell under the train and was killed. The plaintiff submitted proofs of the insured’s death and claimed the double indemnity on the ground that such death was caused directly by accident while traveling as a passenger on the train. The defendant claimed that the insured was at no time traveling as a passenger on the train and that its sole liability was for the single indemnity, which was tendered and refused. The plaintiff then brought this action for the double indemnity but after its commencement accepted payment of the single indemnity without prejudice.
Winfield L. Morse for appellant.
Louis H. Cooke for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ. Absent: Andrews, J.