On the strength of a novel legal theory never before addressed by New York state courts, the Firm thwarted a motion to dismiss counterclaims brought on behalf of its client, a major life insurance company, which was sued for the death benefits on a life insurance policy. On behalf of the insurer, the Firm brought counterclaims on the theory that the individual whom plaintiff claimed was the original insured on the policy and whose death benefits plaintiff claimed a right to, was not actually the person who filled out the policy application and sat for the medical exam—rather, it was a much healthier, unknown imposter. Thus, the Firm argued, (i) the measuring life on the policy is the unknown imposter and not the named insured and (ii) to the extent plaintiff was claiming that the named insured was the original owner of the policy and the one who transferred interest in the policy to plaintiff, that purported insured could not legally have done so, since it was not his to transfer—it was the imposter’s. Plaintiff argued that the Firm’s position failed based on the well-established rule that life insurance policies in New York are “incontestable” after two years. The Kings County Supreme Court (Martin, J.) agreed with the Firm’s position, which had only been advanced once before, in a federal case in 1932. A copy of the Court’s decision can be found here.
