Corn v. United States, 1082.
| Decision Date | 03 December 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 1082.,1082. |
| Citation | 74 F.2d 438 |
| Parties | CORN v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
A. L. Brook, of Muskogee, Okl., for appellant.
W. F. Rampendahl, U. S. Atty., and Philas S. Jones, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Muskogee, Okl., and Will G. Beardslee, Director, Bureau of War Risk Litigation, and Young M. Smith, Atty., Department of Justice, both of Washington, D. C.
Before LEWIS and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and JOHNSON, District Judge.
Grady W. Corn enlisted in the United States Army March 18, 1918, and was honorably discharged March 12, 1919. While in the army he was granted a $10,000 policy of war risk insurance in which his father, Leander P. Corn, was designated beneficiary. The monthly premiums on said policy were paid while insured was in the army by deduction thereof from his pay, but they were not paid after his discharge. Insured died March 28, 1922.
Leander P. Corn, beneficiary, brought this suit May 10, 1932, to recover benefits under said policy, alleging that insured contracted tuberculosis while in the army which rendered him totally and permanently disabled at date of his discharge.
The lower court held that plaintiff was barred under the provisions of Act July 3, 1930, § 4 (38 USCA § 445), amending Act June 7, 1924, § 19, as amended, and dismissed his suit. Plaintiff assigns that ruling as error. The questions raised on this appeal require a consideration of certain correspondence which was put in evidence.
Sandford Martin, an attorney, on February 19, 1931, wrote the following letter (formal parts omitted) to the Veterans' Bureau:
Mr. Martin was advised by letter that said policy had lapsed for non-payment of premiums.
The amendment of July 3, 1930 (section 4 38 USCA § 445), defines the term claim as follows:
"The term `claim' as used in this section, means any writing which alleges permanent and total disability at a time when the contract of insurance was in force, or which uses words showing an intention to claim insurance benefits and the term `disagreement' means a denial of the claim by the director or some one acting in his name on an appeal to the director."
Mr. Martin's letter, supra, did not constitute a claim within the meaning of the statute. It contains no allegation that insured became permanently and totally disabled at a time when the policy of insurance was in force, nor does it use words showing an intention to claim insurance benefits. Wilson v. United States (C. C....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Meakins
...father is "entitled to payment under the terms * * * of the certificate" that the said words do not constitute a claim, Corn v. United States, 10 Cir., 74 F. 2d 438. In the instant case the words used were written by appellee, the letter was received by the appellant on June 6, 1919, the la......
-
American Const. Co. v. United States, 48992.
...F.2d 533; Stallman v. United States, 8 Cir., 1933, 67 F.2d 675; United States v. Thomson, 10 Cir., 1934, 71 F.2d 860; Corn v. United States, 10 Cir., 1934, 74 F.2d 438; Harrop v. United States, D.C. Neb.1935, 10 F.Supp. 753; and Hunnewell v. United States, D.C.N.H.1933, 2 F.Supp. 389, which......
-
United States v. Wallace, 2317.
...be of such a character as to form the basis for a denial and disagreement. United States v. Lockwood, 5 Cir., 81 F.2d 468; Corn v. United States, 10 Cir., 74 F.2d 438; Werner v. United States, 2 Cir., 86 F.2d 113; Chavez v. United States, 10 Cir., 74 F.2d 508; United States v. Collins, supr......
-
Graven v. United States, 13487.
...that it did not constitute a claim for benefits or an application for waiver of premiums, citing in support of his ruling Corn v. United States, 10 Cir., 74 F.2d 438; Chavez v. United States, 10 Cir., 74 F.2d 508; United States v. Lockwood, 5 Cir., 81 F.2d 468; and Werner v. United States, ......