|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
R.J. Palmer
Chief Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 501
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 17, 2004 - 4:15 pm: |       |
Maybrick fun-fact #35. A suit over Maybrick's insurance policy made its way into case law, as Cleaver v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association. It's an interesting case. The insurance company was under the mistaken impression that just because Ms. Maybrick was convicted of murdering her hubby, she ought not be able to claim that the proceeds of her victim's insurance policy. The Maybricks' attorney Mr. Cleaver argued that the contract had nought to do with Ms. M, but was soley between Sir Jim and the Insurance Company; thus, the policy should be honored, and the monies left to those handling Maybrick's estate.
In regards to the so-called Maybrick Diary, it might be noted that Maybrick bought this policy with the Mutual Reserve Life Association in October, 1888. Hmm. October, 1888... In other words, at the very time Maybrick-of-Diary-fame was allegedly seeking 'revenge on the whore and the whoremaster', the historical James Maybrick was actually back in Liverpool buying a life insurance policy.....and naming his beloved wife as the recipient.
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1417
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 5:51 am: | |
Hey RJ,
Firstly I am wondering what Maybrick fun facts #1 through 34 are!?
Secondly that is very interesting that Maybrick should be a piece of case law.
Thirdly (and unfortunately for all concerned) Maybrick bought the policy in October 1888 the month when no ripper murders took place!!
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 165
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 11:12 pm: | |
Rajah...
If you would,please give the URL for the Maybrick section of the Cleaver vs. The MRFLA.
I couldn't locate it.
Thanks...
Howie |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1225
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 9:32 am: | |
Hi Howard
I found more on the 1892 ruling in this case on a Canadian Legal Information Institute site, where the case is cited in the matter of a 1992 Canadian case, Brissette Estate v. Westbury Life Insurance Co.; Brissette Estate v. Crown Life Insurance Co. Go to that page and search for "Maybrick."
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 167
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 1:54 pm: | |
Chris: Thanks very much for that ! I must have overlooked it....Thanks a ton !
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
