Brignac v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of California

• Decision Date: 09 May 1904
• Docket Number: 14,907
• Citation: 112 La. 574,36 So. 595
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: BRIGNAC et al. v. PACIFIC MUT. LIFE INS. CO. OF CALIFORNIA

36 So. 595

112 La. 574

BRIGNAC et al. v. PACIFIC MUT. LIFE INS. CO. OF CALIFORNIA

No. 14,907

Supreme Court of Louisiana

May 9, 1904

NICHOLLS, J. LAND, J., concurs in the decree. PROVOSTY, J dissents.

OPINION On Rehearing.

Defendant presses upon us that the conclusion reached by the court of appeal as to whether or not the insured had committed suicide was not sustained by the testimony in the record, and calls upon us to set it aside.

We have the unquestionable authority, where cases are brought before us through writs of review, to review not only the conclusions of law reached by the court of appeal, but also those of fact, and we would not hesitate doing so where in our judgment the exercise of such authority would be manifestly proper. It is, however, obvious that this court was not intended to be made an appellate court through a mere change in the form of the proceedings by which cases which had been decided below should reach us. The Constitution did not contemplate making it our duty to take up and dispose generally of cases which in character and amount would fall below our regular appellate jurisdiction. A case should present very exceptional features to induce us to do so.

We do not attempt to lay down any rule on that subject, but will leave each case brought up to be tested by its own special features. State ex rel. Satcho v. Judge, 49 La.Ann 235, 21 So. 690.

We do not think the situation of this particular case makes it one for exceptional action. The court of appeal evidently gave to the testimony adduced proper attention. The correctness of its conclusion was not acquiesced in as a matter of course by this court on the original hearing. Our opinion shows the testimony was closely scrutinized and considered, but that, while we were much impressed by the view of that testimony submitted to us by opposing counsel, we were not sufficiently so to declare that the conclusions of fact which were reached by the court of appeal were so clearly wrong as to call for a reversal of the judgment. We have on this rehearing examined the testimony again with the same result. The testimony adduced certainly discloses a number of suspicious circumstances tending to establish that the assured committed suicide, but matters were left enough in doubt on the subject to have warranted the court below in discarding that theory. The case on the facts, we think, is too close for us to interfere. We take occasion, however, to say that, in determining whether or not a party has committed suicide, courts can act on circumstantial evidence as well as on direct evidence and testimony, and are not tied down in the application of the same by the rigid rules of the criminal law. The law requires, however, that the presumptions upon which they act shall be weighty, precise, and consistent. Civ. Code, art. 2288.

In the present case we think the deceased came to his death by opium poisoning, but whether it was taken by himself is not shown, nor is it shown, if taken by himself, whether this was done for the purpose of producing death, or injudiciously, and for the sake of obtaining relief of some kind. There was some evidence introduced (though not very strong in character) on which the latter theory may have been predicated.

If the opium was taken by himself for the purpose of obtaining relief, while in one sense it could be said that he had "come to his death by his own hand," it could not be said that he had committed "suicide." Kling v. Accident Association, 104 La. 766, 29 So. 332.

The district judge rendered judgment in favor of the defendant on the ground that the answers made by the insured, Armand Brignac, to the questions asked by the medical examiner of the defendant, were untrue, and that in making such answers he was guilty of a breach of the warranties of the policy. The court of appeal took a different view, being of the opinion that the statements made by Armand Brignac were mere representations, and that the answers given were not material to the risk, and were true from the standpoint of the intended scope of the questions asked.

The policy of insurance itself is on the first of four pages. On the second page there are printed three headings -- the first being "Benefits and Values" (referred to in the foregoing pages of this policy); the second, "Schedule of Policy Values" (this schedule applies to this policy only if free from indebtedness, but such indebtedness may be paid at any time before policy values are payable); the third, "Schedule of Extended Insurance."

Under these different headings are subordinate headings or entries. Under the heading "Benefits, Conditions and Values," for instance, are the subheadings, "Incontestability," "Payment of Premiums," "Dividends," "Assignment," "Change of Beneficiary," "Service in War," "Error i "Alterations," "Loans," and "Values and Additions."

On the third page the first heading is: "Application for Insurance to the Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company of California." Under this heading, in small type, is printed the following:

"I apply for a contract or policy of life insurance, which, if tendered, I agree to accept, and as consideration therefor offer this application, which includes answers to the Medical Examiner, and which is true and warranted. I agree that any policy which may be granted upon this application shall not be in force until the actual payment to and acceptance of the premium by said Company or its authorized agent while I am in the same condition of health as herein stated. I warrant: That if I die within two years from the date of such policy in consequence of having engaged in any specially hazardous occupation or employment (the specially hazardous occupations or employments herein referred to, are the handling of electric wires or dynamos, blasting, mining, submarine labor, aeronautic ascensions, Arctic explorations, the manufacture, handling and transportation of highly explosive or inflammable substances, service upon any railroad train or in switching and coupling cars, or on any steam or other vessel) without first obtaining written permission of the Company, signed by its President or Vice-President, and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, then such policy shall be null and void; that if I die in consequence of having violated law, or by my own hand, or act voluntary or involuntary sane or insane, during such two years the only liability under said policy shall be for the net reserve held thereon computed according to the Combined Experience Table of Mortality, with interest at four per cent per annum; that in any distribution of surplus or apportionment of dividends, the principles and methods which may be adopted by the Company for such distribution or apportionment, and its determination of the amount equitably belonging to any contract which may be issued under this application, shall be and are hereby ratified and accepted by and for every person who shall have or claim any interest under the contract now proposed; that during the first year succeeding the date of any policy which may be issued hereunder, the reserve value shall be computed upon the Combined Experience Table of Mortality with interest at four per cent per annum for the term rate; that prompt notice of the death of the insured shall be given to the Company, and formal proofs on the Company's blanks be made within one year after death and no suit upon said policy shall be sustainable unless commenced within such year; that such policy shall lapse and be void if any premium or installment thereon is not paid as therein provided, and that then all previous payments shall be forfeited to the Company except as herein otherwise provided; and, further in consideration of the premises, it is understood and agreed that all right or claim for temporary insurance or any other surrendervalue than that provided in such policy is hereby waived and relinquished, whether required by the statute of any other State or not and such contract shall be held and construed at all times and places to have been made in the City of San Francisco, State of California."

Below this, to the left, are 10 paragraphs, opposite to which, to the right, are open spaces to be filled up by the party making the application; for instance:

"1. Name of the person whose life is proposed for insurance.

"2. Occupation. If more than one, state all.

"3. * * *

"4. * * *

"5. * * *

* * * * * *

"10. Do you understand and agree that only the officers at the home office have authority to determine whether or not an Insurance contract shall issue on any Application, and that they act only on the statements and representations in the Application, and that no statements, representations or information made or given by or to the person soliciting or taking this Application for Insurance or to any other person, shall be binding on the Company, or in any manner affect its rights, unless such statements, representations, or information be reduced to writing and presented to the officers of the Company at the Home Office?"

In this application the spaces opposite to these numbers are filled with appropriate entries. Opposite to the number "10" is the entry, "Yes."

Just beneath the copy of the application with its entries, and connected with it, is a heading, "Questions to be Asked by the Medical Examiner," and under it to the left are the questions asked, grouped under numbers, while to the right are the answers given.

The following questions appear under the number "13," with the answers given thereto:

"A. Do you use spirituous, malt or vinous liquors? If so, what kind? No.

Spirituous? No. Malt? No. Vinous? No.

"B. State the average quantity you use each day. No.

"C. Have you at any time...