Cooper v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America

• Decision Date: 25 September 1952
• Citation: 107 N.E.2d 805,329 Mass. 301
• Parties: COOPER v. PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. OF AMERICA.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 805

107 N.E.2d 805

329 Mass. 301

COOPER v. PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. OF AMERICA.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

Argued April 9, 1952.

Decided Sept. 25, 1952.

A. E. Yont, Boston, for plaintiff.

H. W. Corbett, Boston, Innes & Cottrell, Boston, for defendant.

Before QUA, C. J., and LUMMUS, RONAN, SPALDING and WILLIAMS, JJ. QUA, Chief Justice.

This action is by the beneficiary named in an insurance policy to recover under the accidental death benefit provisions of the policy a sum in addition to the regular death benefits. The insured was the husband of the plaintiff. The judge directed a verdict for the defendant and reported the question whether his action was error.

There was evidence that in the evening of November 6, 1948, the dead body of the insured, a man 'a little better than 67 years of age,' was found in Silver Lake at Chesham, New Hampshire, where he and the plaintiff had occupied a cottage the preceding summer. He had come back alone for the purpose of closing up the cottage and of returning to another cottage, about a half mile away, a small metal boat, some tools, and other articles, all of which he had previously borrowed. The body, heavily clothed, was found 'resting over a small stone pier within eight or ten feet from shore with the rumps out of the water and the head and feet under the water.' The boat was found 'up on the shore' nearby about half full of water and containing some of the articles to be returned. Others of these articles were found on the lake bottom about torty or fifty feet out 'directly in front of where the body was found.' The evidence need not be recited in greater detail, nor need we determine whether it would warrant a finding that, as the plaintiff contends, the insured fell out of the boat and was drowned.

The provision of the policy relative to accidental death benefit was this: 'The Monthly Instalments of the Accidental Death Benefit * * * shall be payable * * * upon receipt of due proof that the death of the Insured occurred * * * as a result, directly and independently of all other causes, of bodily injuries, effected solely through external, violent and accidental means. * * *' It is apparent that receipt of the 'due proof' required is a condition precedent to liability for the accidental death benefit, and that the burden rests upon the plaintiff to show that such due proof was supplied. Sherman v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 297 Mass. 330, 8 N.E.2d 892; Belbas v. New York Life Ins. Co., 300 Mass. 471, 473, 15 N.E.2d 806; Howard v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 326 Mass. 722, 724, 96 N.E.2d 708. No time limit for the receipt of such proof seems to have been specified. Due proof means 'evidence proper in form and sufficient in character to indicate the truth of the facts stated, and to show that the event has happened upon which the defendant had promised to pay. The purpose of furnishing the defendant with due proof is to enable it to form an intelligent estimate as to whether the death came within the terms of the policy.' Howe v. National Life Ins. Co., 321 Mass. 283, 285, 72 N.E.2d 425, 427, 170 A.L.R. 1254, and cases cited; Howard v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 326 Mass. 722, 96 N.E.2d 708; Page v. Commercial Travellers' Eastern Accident Association, 225 Mass. 335, 337, 114 N.E. 430.

So far as appears from the evidence the proof furnished by the plaintiff consisted of two items. The first was a sworn statement of the plaintiff simply giving the dates of birth and death of the insured and saying that the cause of death was 'drowning--died from drowning, see clipping,' and claiming the proceeds of the policy. It does not appear what the 'clipping,' if there was one, said or where it came from. So far as appears no information was given as to the place or circumstances of the death from which an inference of accidental drowning could be drawn. Nothing was said as...