Cont'l Life Ins. Co. v. Young

• Citation: 113 Ind. 159, 15 N.E. 220
• Case Date: January 25, 1888
• Court: Supreme Court of Indiana

113 Ind. 159
15 N.E. 220

Continental Life Ins. Co.
v.
Young.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

January 25, 1888.

Appeal from superior court, Marion county.

Plaintiff (appellee) sued the defendant (appellant) upon a policy of life insurance issued by the appellant upon the life of her husband. The appellant defended below upon the plea of breach of warranties contained in the application and policy, in this, that the insured had been afflicted with Bright's disease of the kidneys, and with disease of the urinary and generative organs, and was so afflicted at the time the application for insurance was made. There was a trial by jury, and finding in favor of the appellee. Upon an appeal to general term, the judgment at special term was affirmed, and an appeal was thereupon taken to this court.

Finch & Finch, for appellant.

The court should have taken notice that Bright's disease is a “disease.” It has been held, as a matter of law, that tubercular affections of the lungs, or tubercles upon the lungs, or tubercles on the brain, or consumption constitute a “local disease.” Scoles v. Insurance Co., 42 Cal. 523. Bright's disease is certainly as well known as any of these. There being no evidence introduced by plaintiff below, to show that Bright's disease did not amount to a disease, and defendant's evidence disclosing that it was a disease, and an incurable one, it became the duty of the court to instruct the jury for defendant (appellant) upon this point. Where the evidence for a party is undisputed, upon any point of issue in the case, it is error in the court to allow the jury to decide upon that point. It becomes the duty of the court to instruct in favor of such party upon such point. Beckner v. Turn-Pike Co., 65 Ind. 468; Work Pr. § 789, 514; Geach v. Ingall, 14 Mees. & W. 95.

In a conversation, which occurred about three weeks prior to the making of the application, the insured had told the witness that he did not feel as though he could live long, that he did not feel right inside, and was going to get his life insured. The part underscored the court refused to admit, and therein, we think, it erred. Greenl. Ev. (13th Ed.) 238, § 201. The admissions of the insured made prior to, and not too remote from, the time of application, are admissible evidence. Swift v. Insurance Co., 63 N. Y. 186.

[15 N.E. 221]

After having submitted the fourth interrogatory to the jury, it was error for the court to withdraw it over objection. Railroad Co. v. Dickerson, 59 Ind. 317;Brooker v. Weber, 41 Ind. 426.

The evidence in support of the finding (if the court can find any) is clearly and conclusively contradicted. Such being the case, this court will order a new trial. Martin v. State, 28 Ind. 310. The general rule is that, if there was evidence from which the jury might reasonably have found a fact, this court will not disturb the verdict because there was other evidence in conflict with that on which the finding was based. But where the evidence in support of the finding is clearly and conclusively contradicted, this court will not hesitate to reverse the case. Railway Co. v. Goddard, 25 Ind. 185. Also, see, Railroad Co. v. Bowen, 49 Ind. 154;Young v. Urich, 15 Ind. 326;Marsteller v. Crapp, 62 Ind. 359;Bradford v. Bradford, 59 Ind. 434;Stough v. Smith, 50 Ind. 250;Roe v. Cronkhite, 55 Ind. 183;Norwood v. Harness, 98 Ind. 134;State v. Wilson, 90 Ind. 114;Stringer v. Insurance Co., 82 Ind. 100.

Carter & Binford, for appellee.

Mitchell, C. J.

Nettie Young sued the Continental Life Insurance Company to recover the amount alleged to be due her on a policy of life insurance, issued on the thirtieth day of June, 1883, on the life of Christian Young, the plaintiff's husband. The complaint alleges that the death of Christian Young occurred on the fourth day of August, 1883, and that all of the conditions of the policy had been duly kept and...