Beckerleg v. Locomotive Engineers' Mut. L. & Acc. Ins. Ass'n
Decision Date | 01 July 1925 |
Docket Number | No. 3683.,3683. |
Citation | 274 S.W. 917 |
Parties | BECKERLEG v. LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS' MUT. LIFE & ACCIDENT INS. ASS'N. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Greene County; Guy D. Kirby, Judge.
Action Ritta Beckerleg against the Locomotive Engineers' Mutual Life & Accident insurance Association. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Barbour & McDavid and E. A. Barbour, Jr., all of Springfield, for appellant.
Page & Mason and John Schmook, all of Springfield, for respondent.
Action upon an accident policy for the death of John Beckerleg, the husband of plaintiff. The plaintiff recovered, and defendant appealed.
The evidence shows that the deceased, John Beckerleg, was a locomotive engineer, and had served in that capacity for about 50 years. He had been a member of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers ever since it was organized for more than 40 years. The defendant is an incorporated organization that issues life and accident policies on locomotive engineers only. An accident policy for $2,000 was issued by defendant to John Beckerleg on the 20th of November, 1909, in which the plaintiff was the beneficiary, and which policy was in force at the time of his death, and is made the basis of this suit.
On March 4, 1922, Mr. Beckerleg was in charge of an engine on his regular run from Ft. Smith, Ark., to Springfield, Mo. At a point near Verona, Mo., a superheater flue in the boiler of the engine bursted, and when the train reached Aurora, Mo., a few miles further on, the engine became disabled and was stopped. When the engine stopped, the fact that the superheater flue had bursted caused steam to escape into the cab of the engine where Mr. Beckerleg was located, and the contention of the plaintiff is that this steam enveloped Mr. Beckerleg, and was inhaled by him, and was so hot that it burned his mouth, throat, and bronchial tubes, and caused an infection there which finally produced pleurisy, from which he died April 9, 1923. The contention of defendant is that death did not result from this accident.
The assignments of error are as follows: That the court erred in submitting the case to the jury; that error was committed in giving instructions A and B for plaintiff; error in admitting certain evidence; refusal of the court to grant a new trial on the ground that the jury did not follow the instructions of the court.
The plaintiff's testimony tended to show that deceased was 70 years old at the time of his death, and that prior to the accident he was a very strong, active, and healthy man for one of his age. After the accident, he declined in health, and was never as strong and active as before; had a cough that never entirely left him, and had more or less pain in the right lung or side; could not sleep reclining in a natural position. The chief reliance of plaintiff for proof that the accident caused the death of Mr. Beckerleg was the testimony of the family physician, Dr. Reinhoff, who attended him immediately after the accident and regularly from that time to his death, except from the beginning of November, 1922, to March, 1923. We shall therefore quote at some length from this doctor's testimony. He testified on his examination in chief as follows:
noticeably pushed over to the left side. Repeated examinations made during the following days left no doubt as to the presence of fluid, either of serum or of pus, either in the pleural cavity or in the sight lung itself. The patient, after continued persuasion, finally agreed to have a trial puncture made to verify the diagnosis, and if so to lave the fluid drawn off. On the very morning, on April 9, 1923, when necessary arrangements had been made, and I arrived at his home for that purpose, the patient had had another severe attack of suffocation, and had suddenly expired; and then, in order to prove my opinion about being right, or not, I got permission after he was dead to explore that lung. The undertaker helped me, and we put a tube in there, and then we let out about a quart of milky (so-called sero-perulent) fluid from the right pleural cavity. The lung was not clear yet, so that the sudden death was due to the effects of pleurisy with a large pleural effusion in the right pleural cavity. Such cases come on very gradual; this filling up of the lungs and pleural cavity comes very gradual. Such pleurisies are, according to general experience, due to infections originally starting either in the lung or in the bronchial tubes and gradually affecting the lung tissue itself, and through it the covering pleura. Their beginning is frequently obscure and slow, and so is their progress. Sudden deaths in pleurisy with large quantities of fluid in the cavity are not rare occurrences, probably due to the extreme compression of the lung or of the dislocated heart.
On cross-examination, he testified that the muse of his death was pleurisy. He also identified a statement he had made in March, 1922, shortly after the injury, that was sent to defendant as part of the proof of Mr. Beckerleg on an application under this same policy for loss of time caused by this same accident and resultant injury, in which the doctor stated that injury was "acute bronchitis." The doctor also identified' a death certificate signed by him soon after the death of the insured, in which he stated that the cause of death was "pleurisy of the right side with severe effusion," and that the secondary or contributory cause was "la grippe and chronic myocarditis." Myocarditis was explained to mean a weakening of the heart muscles. He also testified that deceased had been afflicted with both la grippe and myocarditis before this accident, and the effects of both continued present with deceased to the time of his death. He also explained the relation of the bronchial tubes to the lungs as the passageway leading into the lung air cells; that the la grippe probably caused the myocarditis. When asked if, in his opinion, the pleurisy would have resulted fatally had it not been for the effect of the la grippe, he answered "I don't know; that was what contributed to it." Further, on the same question, The deceased was in the Frisco Hospital from February 17, 1923, to March 25, 1923. Dr. Reinhoff saw him again on March 25, 1923, the day he was brought home from the hospital, and he...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Rieger v. Mut. Ins. Co. of N.Y.
... ... App. 369; Hooper v. Standard Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 166 Mo. App. 209. (6) Plaintiffs' Instruction ... (2d) 169; Beckerleg v. Locomotive Engineers' Mutual Assn., 274 S.W. 922. (7) ... ...
-
Fuentes v. Tucker
... ... (Travelers Ins. Co. v. Byers, 123 Cal.App. 473, 482 [11 P.2d ... In the case of John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Moore, 34 Mich. 41, a ... 188 [200 S.E. 689]; Beckerleg v. Locomotive Engineers, etc. Assn., (Mo.App.), ... ...
-
Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United States v. Gratiot, 1742
... ... Stanton v. Trav. Ins. Co., (Conn.) 78 A. 317, 34 L ... R. A. (N. ) 445; Com. Trav. Mut. Acc. Assn. v. Fulton, ... et al., 79 F. 423; ... recovery might be had. See also Beckerleg v. Life & Acc ... Assn., (Mo.) 274 S.W. 917 ... ...
-
Warren v. Giudici, 30117.
...Peters v. Hooven & Allison Co., 281 S.W. 71; Agee v. Herring, 221 Mo. App. 1022, 298 S.W. 250; Beckerleg v. Locomotive Engineers Ins. Co., 274 S.W. 917; Irwin v. McDougal, 217 Mo. App. 645, 274 S.W. 923; Speer v. Railroad Co., 282 S.W. 131; Courtney's Estate v. Lanznar's Estate, 296 S.W. 26......