Cunningham v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, Pa
Decision Date | 27 November 1922 |
Docket Number | 23761 |
Citation | 152 La. 1023,95 So. 110 |
Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
Parties | CUNNINGHAM v. PENN MUT. LIFE INS. CO. OF PHILADELPHIA, PA |
Rehearing Denied January 27, 1923
Appeal from Eighteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Acadia Wm. Campbell, Judge.
Action by Grace Hunter Cunningham against the Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company of Philadelphia, Pa. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Smith & Carmouche, of Crowley, and Monroe & Lemann and Walter J. Suthon, Jr., all of New Orleans, for appellant.
George P. Lessley, of La Fayette, Philip S. Pugh, of Crowley, and Mouton & DeBaillon, of La Fayette, for appellee.
OPINION
Plaintiff sues upon a policy of insurance covering the life of her deceased husband. The defenses pleaded are suicide, and that deceased answered falsely certain material questions propounded in his application for insurance concerning his habits, and his having consulted physicians about his health. No serious effort was made to sustain any of these except that of the false answers to questions about consultations with doctors, and there was judgment for plaintiff, from which defendant prosecutes this appeal.
Opinion.The policy was issued in January, and the insured died in November, 1916. In the application for insurance, he was required to answer the following questions:
His answers were:
The answer does not specifically allege fraud, the averments with respect to these replies being as follows:
It is entirely possible for answers to such questions to be knowingly untrue from a literal standpoint, and yet not fraudulent, for the applicant may, in good faith, have considered the facts not of sufficient importance to report, especially in view of the law, as announced by the decisions of this court and sustained by the jurisprudence of the other states, to the point that inconsequential illnesses do not have to be disclosed, even though they may have occasioned the attendance of a physician. Goff et al. v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 131 La. 98, 59 So. 28, Cole v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 129 La. 704, 56 So. 645, Ann. Cas. 1913B, 748, and authorities cited in those cases. Nothing is charged to show that, if the information was material, deceased knew of it, or that his action was not due to honestly mistaken judgment. Fraud must be specially pleaded, and, for the reason just stated, that is, the answer does not aver the incorrect replies to have been given with a fraudulent purpose, we think the pleading falls short of the requirement of the law. 12 R. C. L. p. 416, verbo Fraud, § 164, and authorities in footnote; 3 La. Dig. p. 710 et seq. See, also, 3 Cooley's Briefs on Ins. p. 1956.
While there was no objection to the evidence which was offered on the part of defendant, to the point that fraud had not been pleaded, this has not broadened the pleading, for the reason that it was all admissible upon the question of materiality, treating the answers of the applicant for insurance as representations. Tensas Delta Land Co. v. Ferguson, 128 La. 171, 54 So. 708; Rogers v. Southern Fiber Co., 119 La. 714, 44 So. 442, 121 Am. St. Rep. 537; Bonnette v. Wise, 111 La. 855, 35 So. 953; Wortham's Civil Procedure, vol. 1, p. 255.
We conclude, therefore, that, fraud not having been alleged, the situation is the same as if the defense rested upon the ground that the answers were representations, not warranties, and avoided the policy because material to the risk, and were untrue. Act No. 52 of 1906.
It is a fact, undisputed, that deceased did, on May 30, 1914, while in the city of New Orleans taking a special course in laboratory work (being himself a physician), visit a firm of specialists in genito-urinary diseases, and, according to their office chart, supported by their oral testimony, the following conditions were recorded:
The patient
This constituted the history of his trouble, as reported by the patient, and, as the result of their examination, these physicians entered these notes:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Cunningham
...Security L. Ins. Co. v. Brimmer (C. C. A.) 36 F.(2d) 176; New York L. Ins. Co. v. Moats (C. C. A.) 207 F. 481; Cunningham v. Penn Mutual L. Ins. Co., 152 La. 1023, 95 So. 110; Prudential Life Ins. Co. v. Sellers, 54 Ind. App. 326, 102 N. E. 894; Mutual Reserve Life Ins. Co. v. Dobler (C. C.......
-
Turner v. The Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company of California
... ... (Keeton ... v. Jefferson Standard Life Ins. Co., 5 F.2d 183, 187; 4 ... Cooley's Briefs on Insurance, ... St. 180, 29 L. R. A. (N. S.) ... 433; Cunningham v. Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co., 152 ... La. 1023, 95 So ... Vt. 474, 18 A. 45; Caruthers v. Kansas Mut. Life Ins ... Co., 108 F. 487; Mutual Life Ins. Co. of ... 474; Welch v. Fire Assn. of ... Philadelphia, 120 Wis. 456, 98 N.W. 227; Schmitt v ... Massachusetts ... ...
-
Lobell, for Use and Benefit of Hardware Mut. Cas. Co. v. Neal, 3294
..., 715, 44 So. 422, 121 Am.St.Rep. 537; Bonnette v. Wise, 111 La. 855, 35 So. 953.' 'In the case of Cunningham v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, Pa., 152 La. 1023, 95 So. 110, 111, the court said: 'While there was no objection to the evidence which was offered on the part of defend......
-
Brown v. Inter-State Bus. Men's Acc. Ass'n of Des Moines
...view of the fact that the bleeding therefrom produced septicæmia and this septicæmia was the cause of death. In Cunningham v. Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co., 152 La. 1023, 95 So. 110, the court says: “It is entirely possible for answers to such questions to be knowingly untrue from a literal sta......