Bennett v. National Fire Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 10 June 1940
• Docket Number: No. 19628.,19628.
• Citation: 143 S.W.2d 479
• Parties: ALICE J. BENNETT, RESPONDENT, v. NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, APPELLANT.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

143 S.W.2d 479

ALICE J. BENNETT, RESPONDENT, v. NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, APPELLANT.

No. 19628.

Kansas City Court of Appeals, Missouri.

June 10, 1940.

Appeal from Circuit Court of Saline County — Hon. Charles Lyons, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Lamkin James and Borders, Warrick & Hazard for appellant, The National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford.

(1) The contract made with Dolores E. Ray voided the policy regardless of the fact that she retained an interest and that such contract was not completely performed. The doctrine of waiver cannot be applied to create liability. (a) The contract of sale was such a change in title and interest as to void the policy. Beckmann v. Beckmann, 58 S.W. (2d) 490; Waugh v. Williams, 342 Mo. 903, 119 S.W. (2d) 223; Standard Oil Co. v. Dye, 223 Mo. App. 926, 20 S.W. (2d) 946; Manning v. North British Ins. Co., 123 Mo. App. 456, 99 S.W. 1095; Mahan v. Home Ins. Co., 205 Mo. App. 592, 226 S.W. 593; Hubbard v. Home Ins. Co., 295 Mo. App. 316, 222 S.W. 886; Russell v. Home Ins. Co., 262 S.W. 385, 216 Mo. App. 244; National Fire Ins. Co. v. Munger, 106 S.W. (2d) 10. (b) The cancellation of the contract with Dolores E. Ray (if done) could not have the effect of reviving the policy. Marcus v. Rhode Island Ins. Co., 187 Mo. App. 134, 173 S.W. 30; Trust Co. of St. Louis v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 298 Mo. 472, 210 S.W. 98; National Fire Ins. Co. v. Munger, I A, I C and I D. (c) The principles of waiver cannot be applied to create liability. Mahan v. Home Ins. Co., 205 Mo. App. 592, 226 S.W. 593; National Fire Insurance Co. v. Munger, supra; State ex rel. v. Mo. Utilities Co., 331 Mo. 337, 53 S.W. (2d) 394; McLain v. Mercantile Trust Co., 292 Mo. 114, 237 S.W. 506; State ex rel. Moss v. Hamilton, 303 Mo. 302, 260 S.W. 466; Mitchell v. American Mutual Ass'n, 226 Mo. App. 696, 46 S.W. (2d) 231; Berry v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Co., 203 Mo. App. 459, 221 S.W. 748. (d) This plaintiff did not attempt to insure any remaining interest she had after making the contract of sale. She was required to insure that interest as such and failing to do so she cannot recover. Mahan v. Home Ins. Co., supra; Manning v. North British Ins. Co., supra; National Fire Ins. Co. v. Munger, supra; Prudential Ins. Co. v. German Mutual Life Insurance Association, 228 Mo. App. 139, 60 S.W. (2d) 1008. (2) No recovery can be had because Alice J. Bennett was not the sole and unconditional owner at the time of the loss. Beckmann v. Beckmann, 58 S.W. (2d) 490; Waugh v. Williams, 342 Mo. 903, 119 S.W. (2d) 223; Standard Oil Co. v. Dye, 223 Mo. App. 926, 20 S.W. (2d) 946; 5 Pomeroy's Eq. Juris (2 Ed.), par. 2285; Boynton v. Salinger, 147 Iowa, 537, 126 N.W. 369; Jones v. Bowling, 17 Mich. 288; Ward v. Obenauer, 119 Mich. 17, 77 N.W. 305; Carns v. Sexsmith, 193 Iowa, 1080, 188 N.W. 657; Conners v. Winans, 122 Misc. 824, 204 N.Y.S. 142; Oddfellows Savings Bank v. Brander, 124 Cal. 255, 56 Pac. 1109; Gaston v. White, 46 Mo. 486, 77 A.L.R. 270; Stewart v. Griffith, 217 U.S. 323, 54 L. Ed. 782; Burns Mortgage Co. v. Schwartz, 72 F. (2d) 991; Wilcoxen v. Sitt, 65 Cal. 596; Dana v. St. Paul Investment Co., 42 Minn. 194, 44 N.W. 55; Mason v. Caldwell, 10 Ill. 196; Pioneer Gold Mining Co. v. Price, 189 Mo. App. 30, 176 S.W. 474. (3) Plaintiff's Instruction No. 2 erroneously submitted to the jury the determination of a question of law, i.e., whether or not the failure of Dolores E. Ray to make all the payments required by her contract terminated her equitable interest so as to make Alice J. Bennett the sole and unconditional owner. Stoddart v. National Liberty Ins. Co., 251 S.W. 398; Williams v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 47 S.W. (2d) 207; Jones Store Co. v. Kelly, 36 S.W. (2d) 681; Henry v. Ill. Central R. Co., 282 S.W. 423; Macklin v. Fogel Construction Co., 31 S.W. (2d) 214. (4) The evidence was insufficient to show waiver because Dr. Bennett testified that his conversation with Boehmer occurred prior to the making of the contract with Dolores E. Ray. Notice of a contemplated or future breach is not sufficient to show waiver. Rogers v. Home Ins. Co., 155 Mo. App. 276, 136 S.W. 743; Patterson v. Inc. Co., 164 Mo. App. 157, 148 S.W. 448; Harwood v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 170 Mo. App. 298, 156 S.W. 475; Boyle v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 250 S.W. 641. (5) Plaintiff's instruction No. 2 was erroneous because it authorized the jury to find a waiver if defendant's agent was advised that plaintiff would in the future convey the property by contract of sale. Boyle v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 250 S.W. 641. (6) The court should have sustained defendant's demurrer for the reason that the plaintiff relies on a waiver arising out of an alleged conversation between Dr. Bennett and Adolph Boehmer and the evidence showed that Boehmer ceased to be the defendant's agent before the alleged conversation occurred. Sisk v. American Central Fire Ins. Co., 95 Mo. App. 695, 69 S.W. 687; McCullough v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 113 Mo. 606, 21 S.W. 207. (7) The court erred in submitting to the jury the issue of vexatious refusal to pay. Aufrichtig v. Columbian National Life Ins. Co., 298 Mo. 1, 249 S.W. 912; Miller v. Firemen's Ins. Co., 206 Mo. App. 475, 229 S.W. 261; Mangelsdorf v. Penn Fire Ins. Co., 224 Mo. App. 265, 26 S.W. (2d) 818; State v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 317 Mo. 1078, 298 S.W. 83; Berryman v. Southern Surety Co., 285 Mo. 379, 227 S.W. 96; Liebing v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 269 Mo. 509, 226 S.W. 897; Mound City Tile Co. v. Springfield F. & M. Ins. Co., 218 Mo. App. 395, 277 S.W. 349; Rollins v. Business Men's Accident Ass'n, 204 Mo. App. 679, 220 S.W. 1022; Deskin v. United States Ins. Corp., 221 Mo. App. 1151, 298 S.W. 103; Wood v. K.C. Life Ins. Co., 228 Mo. App. 797, 75 S.W. (2d) 412; Rieger v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 110 S.W. (2d) 878; Cooper v. National Life Ins. Co., 212 Mo. App. 266, 253 S.W. 465; McNabb v. Niagara Ins. Co., 224 Mo. App. 796, 22 S.W. (2d) 364; Delametter v. Home Ins. Co., 126 S.W. (2d) 262; State ex rel. Continental Ins. Co. v. Allen, 303 Mo. 608; 262 S.W. 43; State v. Shain, 334 Mo. 385, 66 S.W. (2d) 871; Rucker v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co., 109 S.W. (2d) 911; Terry v. Woodmen Accident Co., 225 Mo. App. 1223, 34 S.W. (2d) 163.

J. Marion Robertson and W.T. Bellamy for respondent, Alice J. Bennett.

(1) Plaintiff, having retained an insurable interest in the insured property which was contracted to be sold to Dolores E. Ray, and defendant knowing of the sale at the time it was made, without cancelling the insurance or refunding the premium, constituted a waiver by defendant of the sole ownership and change of title provisions in the policy. Ormsby v. Laclede Farmers' Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 98 Mo. App. 371, 72 S.W. 139; Barnard v. National Fire Ins. Co., 38 Mo. App. 106; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 30 S.W. (2d) 870; Nute v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 109 Mo. App. 585, 83 S.W. 83; Fields v. German American Ins. Co., 140 Mo. App. 158, 120 S.W. 697; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 329 Mo. 207, 44 S.W. (2d) 115; Morrison's Admr. v. Tennessee Marine & Fire Ins. Co., 18 Mo. 262; Shutts v. Ins. Co., 159 Mo. App. 436, 141 S.W. 15. (2) The local agent of an insurance company who has authority to make insurance contracts, countersign, issue and deliver policies and receive premiums, may waive stipulations in the policy notwithstanding printed stipulations to the contrary. Heller v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 63 S.W. (2d) 461; Walpers v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co., 61 S.W. (2d) 224; Bergerson v. General Ins. Co., 232 Mo. App. 549, 105 S.W. (2d) 1015; Patten v. Springfield Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 25 S.W. (2d) 1075; Beall v. North Missouri Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 99 S.W. (2d) 492; Fields v. German American Ins. Co., 140 Mo. App. 158, 120 S.W. 697; Nute v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 109 Mo. App. 585, 83 S.W. 83; Ormsby v. Laclede Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 98 Mo. App. 371, 72 S.W. 139; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 329 Mo. 207, 44 S.W. (2d) 115; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 30 S.W. (2d) 870; Barnard v. National Fire Ins. Co., 38 Mo. App. 106. (3) Actual knowledge by the insurer of the breach of the policy provision relied on for forfeiture is not essential to establish a waiver of the provision. If defendant had information, which, if pursued with reasonable diligence, would have led to the discovery of the breach, it was sufficient. Loduca v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 105 S.W. (2d) 1011; Bailey v. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co., 166 Mo. App. 593, 149 S.W. 1169; Supreme Lodge v. Kolinski, 163 U.S. 289. (4) The evidence of waiver was amply sufficient because it showed that defendant's agent was fully informed as to the Dolores E. Ray contract of sale and knew the sale had been made and that the Rays had taken possession. Loduca v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 105 S.W. (2d) 1011; Bailey v. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co., 166 Mo. App. 593, 149 S.W. 1169; Ormsby v. Laclede Farmers' Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 98 Mo. App. 371, 72 S.W. 139; Barnard v. National Fire Ins. Co., 38 Mo. App. 106; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 30 S.W. (2d) 870; Nute v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 109 Mo. App. 585, 83 S.W. 83; Fields v. German American Ins. Co., 140 Mo. App. 158, 120 S.W. 697; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 329 Mo. 207, 44 S.W. (2d) 115. (5) Alice J. Bennett was sole and unconditional owner of the insured premises from the time she took possession after default. If it was necessary for her to elect between collecting the balance of the purchase price from Mrs. Ray or taking the property, she did so by claiming sole ownership in the petition and reply. In any event, it was not necessary for plaintiff to prove sole ownership, but only an insurable interest at the time of the loss. Ormsby v. Laclede Farmers' Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 98 Mo. App. 371, 72 S.W. 139; Barnard v. National Fire Ins. Co., 38 Mo. App. 106; Fulbright v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 30 S.W. (2d) 870; Nute v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 109 Mo. App....