Block v. Mylish
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
351 Pa. 611, 41 A.2d 731 (1945)

- Written by Kelly Simon, JD
Facts
Alfred Mann and two others—Isaac D. Mylish and Jerome J. Drucker (defendants)—were partners in the firm Mylish, Mann and Drucker. The partnership took out a pair of life-insurance policies on each partner for an aggregate amount of $60,000 per partner. The partnership was the named beneficiary of all the policies. Mann died in 1943, naming Gordan A. Block (plaintiff) as his executor. The partnership agreement in place at the time of Mann’s death allowed the surviving partners an option to purchase Mann’s interest. The agreement also called for any life-insurance proceeds to belong to the surviving co-partnership. Mylish and Drucker contended that the proceeds from the life insurance should be exempted from the valuation of the partnership for purposes of buying Mann’s portion from his estate. Block contended that the proceeds from the life insurance became an asset of the partnership and had to be included in a determination of its value. Block argued the valuation, including the life-insurance proceeds, was essential to determining the amount due the Mann estate in exchange for the partnership share. Block filed for a declaratory judgment, and the trial court found in favor of Block and the estate. Mylish and Drucker appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.