Bene v. New York Life Insurance Company
Decision Date | 25 November 1935 |
Docket Number | 4-4048 |
Citation | 87 S.W.2d 979,191 Ark. 714 |
Parties | BENE v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Second Division; Richard M. Mann Judge; affirmed.
Action by Sylvia Bene against the New York Life Insurance Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff has appealed.
Judgment affirmed.
Isgrig & Robinson, for appellant.
Louis H. Cooke and Rose, Hemingway, Cantrell & Loughborough, for appellee.
The appellant brought this suit in the Pulaski Circuit Court to recover $ 1,969, 12 per cent. penalty, and a reasonable attorney's fee, against the appellee. Appellant was the beneficiary in a policy of insurance issued by the appellee insuring the life of appellant's husband, in the sum of $ 2,000. The insured died on March 11, 1933, and due notice was furnished the insurance company. There was an indebtedness due the company from the insured in the sum of $ 85.90, and a dividend due of $ 55.72, leaving a net indebtedness due the company of $ 30.18.
The appellee answered denying the material allegations in the complaint. It is agreed that the yearly premiums for the years 1925, 192.6 and 1927 were paid in cash, and that the premium due for the year 1928 was paid by a loan on the policy. It is agreed that the premium for 1929 was not paid.
The evidence introduced by appellee tended to show that, when the policy lapsed, there was not sufficient reserve to pay for extended insurance to the insured's death. Evidence was introduced showing that a surrender charge was necessary if the policy was surrendered or lapsed from the third to the ninth years.
The policy contains the following provisions:
It is unnecessary to set out the evidence because there is no dispute about the facts. The only question presented for our consideration is: Was the appellee justified in making a surrender charge in this case?
The policy provides that the cash surrender value shall be the reserve on the face of the policy at the end of the insurance year, or, in the event of default, at the date of default, and the reserve on any outstanding paid-up additions, plus any dividends, standing to the credit of the policy, and less a surrender charge for the third to the ninth years, inclusive, of not more than one and one-half per cent. of the face of the policy. It will be seen that the contract itself provides for a surrender charge. It is agreed that if this surrender charge is a proper charge, and not prohibited by public policy, the insurance was not extended to the time of the insured's death; but that if the surrender charge was prohibited by public policy, the insurance was extended beyond the death of the insured, and appellant would be entitled to recover.
The appellant states that the main question is whether appellee was justified in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Nessossis
...is the full measure of the insured's rights. Atlantic Life Ins. Co. v. Pharr (C. C. A. 6), 59 F.2d 1024; Bene v. N.Y.Life Ins. Co., 191 Ark. 714; Bostik v. Va. Life Ins. Co., 93 F.2d 557; Brown v. Mutual Life (S. C.), 195 S.E. 552; Bryant v. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. (Tenn.), 109 F. 748;......
-
WR Grimshaw Company v. Nevil C. Withrow Co.
...Trust Company, 8 Cir., 296 F. 789, 35 A.L.R. 856; Dick v. Marx & Rawolle, 55 App.D.C. 267, 4 F.2d 879; Cf., Bene v. New York Life Insurance Co., 191 Ark. 714, 87 S.W.2d 979. We find the same rule applied by the Supreme Court of Arkansas in National Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. Blanton, ......
-
O'Connell v. Sewell
... ... 60,328.23 held by the Gulf Refining Company of Louisiana, ... constituting the proceeds of the ... Ab Berry surrendered his life estate or curtesy interest in ... the 160-acre tract to ... ...
-
Farmers Bank of Greenwood v. Perry
...that this provision is against public policy, assuming that is the implicit holding of the majority. In Bene v. New York Life Insurance Co., 191 Ark. 714, 87 S.W.2d 979 (1935), we As to whether a contract is against the public policy is a question of law for the court to determine from all ......