62 So. 954 (Ala.App. 1913), U.S. Health & Accident Ins. Co. v. Hill

Citation:62 So. 954, 9 Ala.App. 222
Opinion Judge:[9 Ala.App. 225] PELHAM, J.
Party Name:UNITED STATES HEALTH & ACCIDENT INS. CO. v. HILL.
Attorney:Palmer P. Daugette, of Birmingham, for appellant. George E. Bush, or Birmingham, for appellee.
Case Date:June 17, 1913
Court:Alabama Court of Appeals
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 954

62 So. 954 (Ala.App. 1913)

9 Ala.App. 222

UNITED STATES HEALTH & ACCIDENT INS. CO.

v.

HILL.

Court of Appeals of Alabama

June 17, 1913

         Rehearing Denied June 27, 1913

         Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; E.C. Crowe, Judge.

         Action by William Hill against the United States Health & Accident Insurance Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

         The complaint declares upon an action of insurance policy issued by said defendant to plaintiff December 21, 1909, in which said policy defendant insured plaintiff against accidents to the person for the terms of one year, and agreed to pay plaintiff the sum of $10 per week so long as he should be disabled from following his usual occupation by reason of said accident, and plaintiff avers that on or about the 14th day of January, 1910, he suffered an injury by reason of an accident which disabled him from following his usual occupation for the space of 10 weeks, of which said defendant has had notice, and has failed and refused to pay the same. The third plea set up an application in which plaintiff stated that he had no other accident or health insurance in this or any other company, association, or society, and that he warranted the statement to be true, but that said statement was untrue, and that the policy was issued upon the faith of said certificate. The fourth plea set up the same application and representations, and that the representation was false and was known to plaintiff to be false at the time, and that the policy was issued on the faith of such representation. The fifth is practically the same as the third and fourth combined. The sixth plea sets out the question and answer, and alleges the same to be material and false, and that the policy was issued on the faith of such statement. The seventh is the same as the third. Defendant afterwards filed pleas A, B, and C, which set up in full the application, and make the allegations alleged in the former pleas, setting out what other companies he was insured in, together with the conditions governing the same.

         It appeared from the evidence that plaintiff had insurance in several other accident companies, and had been paid by several of them for the accident here sued. C.W. Austin testified that he had had much experience in comparing handwriting obtained from long experience of years of service as a detective and as chief...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP