Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Hagemyer
| Decision Date | 15 December 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 6317.,6317. |
| Citation | 53 F.2d 636 |
| Parties | ETNA LIFE INS. CO. v. HAGEMYER et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Harry P. Lawther, of Dallas, Tex., for appellant.
P. O. Beard and Cary M. Abney, both of Marshall, Tex., for appellees.
Before BRYAN, FOSTER, and HUTCHESON, Circuit Judges.
This is another of those suits upon a double indemnity provision in a life insurance policy in which the insured having come to his death at the hands of another, the beneficiary insists, and the insurer denies, that the death of the insured "resulted directly and independently of all other causes from bodily injuries effected solely through external, violent and accidental means." The only eyewitness to the killing was the slayer, Wiley Page, the nephew and tenant of the deceased, Ike Killingsworth. The appellant proffered him as a witness, and upon his version of the killing, that he shot only in self-defense and to repel his uncle's deadly assault upon him, the insurer requested a directed verdict. The lower court took appellees' view of the matter that, though no witness directly contradicted the testimony of Page as to the manner of the occurrence, the fact that circumstances in evidence tended to discredit it, and particularly the fact that Page, as the slayer of his uncle, had the strong motive to exculpate himself from the guilt of parricide, made the issue, whether the killing was accidental within the meaning of the policy, one of fact. In an appropriate charge not complained of, he sent that issue to the jury. It is from a verdict finding that the death was accidental, a judgment on that verdict, and the later overruling of defendants' motion for a new trial (Killingsworth v. Etna Life Ins. Co. (D. C.) 49 F.(2d) 399) that this appeal is prosecuted.
Appellant presents two contentions here: (1) That the testimony of Wiley Page as to the killing, standing uncontradicted by the testimony of any other witness, must be as a matter of law accepted as true; and (2) if this is not so, and the self-exculpatory testimony of Wiley Page be rejected, the defendant was still entitled to its instruction, because, without his testimony, there was no sufficient explanation of the circumstances of the death to bring the killing within the terms of the policy.
Appellant cannot stand on either of these contentions. Appellees' evidence, standing alone, made a prima facie case of accidental killing....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Republic Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Heyward
...1933, no writ); Black v. Continental Casualty Co., 19 S.W.2d 69 (Tex.Civ.App.--Austin 1929, no writ); Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Hegemyer, 53 F.2d 636 (5th Cir. 1931), cert. denied, 285 U.S. 542, 52 S.Ct. 314, 76 L.Ed. 934 (1932); Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York v. Sargent, 51 F.2d 4......
-
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Murdaugh
...S. Mutual Acc. Ass'n, 92 Iowa 652, 61 N.W. 485; Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Little, 146 Ark. 70, 225 S.W. 298." See, also, Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Hagemyer, 5 Cir., 53 F.2d 636, certiorari denied 285 U.S. 542, 52 S.Ct. 314, 76 L.Ed. 934; Boggan v. Provident L. & A. Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 79 F.2d 721, ......
-
Republic Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Heyward
...was not bound by their testimony. Praetorian Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Sherman, 455 S.W.2d 201 (Tex.1970); Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Hagemyer, 53 F.2d 636 (5th Cir. 1931). The jury could not, however, find the converse of such testimony in the absence of independent evidence to support ......
-
Heyward v. Republic Nat. Life Ins. Co.
...and Insurance Company v. Santee, 62 F.2d 724 (9th Cir.) 1933; Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Sargent, supra; Aetna Life Insurance Company v. Hagemyer, 53 F.2d 636 (5th 1931, Cert. denied, 285 U.S. 542, 52 S.Ct. 314, 76 L.Ed. 934, 1932; Smith v. Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, 3......