Pullen v. Sun Life Ins. Co. of America, 7760.

Decision Date16 June 1941
Docket NumberNo. 7760.,7760.
Citation74 App. DC 197,121 F.2d 110
PartiesPULLEN v. SUN LIFE INS. CO. OF AMERICA.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit

Samuel W. McCart, of Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Benjamin S. Minor, Arthur P. Drury, John M. Lynham, and John E. Powell, all of Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Before GRONER, C. J., and MILLER and VINSON, JJ.

GRONER, C. J.

This is a companion case to Eureka-Maryland Assurance Corp. v. Gray, No. 7643, ___ App.D.C. ___, 121 F.2d 104, and was submitted at the same time. This suit was brought by the beneficiary in a policy of industrial life insurance. The policy provided that, if within two years of the date of issue the insured had received treatment or been attended by any physician for any serious disease, then in such case the policy should be voidable unless reference to such treatment was indorsed on the policy. The policy was dated June 20, 1938, and provided that it constituted the entire agreement. There was, however, admittedly an application, and on demand of the plaintiff this was produced and offered in evidence. There were no indorsements on the policy showing that insured had ever been attended by a physician for a serious disease or had ever received treatment in a hospital. The application, which plaintiff introduced in evidence, showed that insured had stated that he had never had tuberculosis, chronic bronchitis, cancer, sarcoma, diabetes, syphilis, anemia, or disease of the heart, liver, kidneys, blood vessels, or stomach, and that he had never received or applied for treatment in any hospital, dispensary, sanatorium, or other institution.

After the plaintiff had proved the policy, payment of the premium, and the death of the insured, and had rested, the defendant offered in evidence the hospital and clinical records of Georgetown Hospital showing that insured had been a patient at the hospital clinic on December 21, 1937, January 7 and 14, March 9 and 20, April 12 and 26, and on May 10 and June 14, 1938; that he had been admitted to Georgetown Hospital on January 17, 1938, and remained there as a patient until his discharge on February 24, 1938; and that on each of these occasions and while a patient in the hospital the insured had received treatment and been attended by one or more physicians. Plaintiff objected to the admission of these records, on the ground that she had proved that there had been a written application for the policy of insurance and that neither the application nor a copy was attached to the policy; that the application covered the question of medical attention prior to the application and that under the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Pannunzio v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 35421
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • 11 de junho de 1958
    ......191, 121 F.2d 104, certiorari denied 314 U.S. 613, 62 S.Ct. 114, 86 L.Ed. 494; Pullen v. Sun Life Ins. Co. of America, 74 App.D.C. 197, 121 F.2d 110, certiorari denied 314 U.S. 613, 62 ......
  • Eureka-Maryland Assur. Co. v. Gray, 7643.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 16 de junho de 1941
    ......J.         This is a suit on an industrial life" insurance policy. The important clause is as follows:.   \xC2"...Ins. Co. v. Burton, 287 U.S. 97, 53 S.Ct. 26, 77 L.Ed. 196, 87 ...Co. of America v. Kozlowski, 226 Wis. 641, 276 N.W. 300; Frederick v. ......
  • Wash. Nat. Ins. Co. v. Stanton, 9.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • 23 de novembro de 1942
    ...the trial judge must take the case from the jury and rule as a matter of law in favor of the insurer. Pullen v. Sun Life Ins. Co. of America, 1941, 74 App.D.C. 197, 121 F.2d 110. It is, however, equally well established that where plaintiff creates a substantial issue of fact on the questio......
  • Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Adams., 179.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • 5 de maio de 1944
    ...of the plaintiff. Directed verdicts for the defendant on this ground are frequent in the Federal courts. Pullen v. Sun Life Ins. Co. of America, 74 App.D.C. 197, 121 F.2d 110, is a recent insurance case in which the defendant had the burden of proof and in which a directed verdict for the d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT