O'Daniell v. Missouri Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 03 November 1959 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 59 |
| Citation | 164 N.E.2d 78,24 Ill.App.2d 10 |
| Parties | Lucille O'DANIELL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MISSOURI INSURANCE CO., a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant. M 15. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Feirich & Feirich, Carbondale, for appellant.
Fletcher Lewis, Murphysboro, for appellee.
The plaintiff, as beneficiary under a life insurance policy, obtained a judgment against the insurer, based upon and enforcing a double liability provision in the policy. The sole question before this court is the proper construction of an exclusion clause, which read as follows:
'There shall be no liability on the part of the company under the double indemnity benefit of the policy if the death of the insured results from suicide while sane or insane or from submarine diving or aeronautic operations as a passenger or otherwise, or while the insured is in military or naval service of any country, or if any pre-existing ailment or disease contributes with the bodily injury to cause the insured's death.'
On this appeal the defendant, Missouri Insurance Company, contends that the so-called military exclusion clause above quoted, relieves it from the double indemnity provision. There is no dispute as to the facts, it being stipulated that the deceased was in military service at the time of his death, but he was on furlough and met his death while driving an automobile on a purely social mission personal to himself. The company paid the face amount of the policy, but refused to pay double that amount.
It may be observed the policy provides for a series of exclusions in case death results from certain causes, then, in the disjunctive, there is the exclusion: 'Or while the insured is in military or naval service.' This phrase cannot be attached to the preposition, 'from,' because there is no such English construction as this: 'results from while in military service.'
It appears to this court that 'while in military service' is a plain and unambiguous exclusion of the double indemnity provision while the insured is in military or naval service, since that is exactly what it says. There are other exclusions which require a causal connection to become effective, but that can hardly justify a judicial finding that a plain and simple exclusion based on status has been made ambiguous.
Cases hereafter cited disclose that some policies provide for exclusion of the double indemnity while in military service, unless an additional premium is paid, others specifically state that, if the death is caused by or results from military service, it is excluded. This type of policy produces the most of the litigation for the reason that, unless the death occurs on the battle front, it is often very difficult to decide whether there was any causal connection between the service and the death.
There appears to be no precedent in a court of review of this state which construes a military exclusion clause, but such clauses have been the source of a great deal of litigation in other states, and the precedents are numerous. The case of Laurendeau v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 116 Vt. 183, 71 A.2d 588, 591, contains an analysis of some of the cases and finds that there are two types of military exclusion clauses, which the court designates as 'status' or 'result' clauses. It was found that status clauses contain the phrase, 'while in the Military or Naval service in time of war' or words of similar import; result clauses contain such phrases as 'in consequence' or 'resulting from' or 'as the result of engaging'in military service.
The foregoing case is cited in defendant's brief, together with a list of cases in which the excluding phrase was held to apply when the status of military service existed, regardless of causal connection, such as 'if accidental death results while insured is 'in' military service,' Parrino v. Prudential Ins. Co., 275 App.Div. 861, 89 N.Y.S.2d 245, 246. 'No such benefit shall be payable if such death results * * * while a member of the military, naval or air forces of any country at war,' Saladino v. Prudential Ins. Co., 188 Misc. 601, 68 N.Y.S.2d 35, 37, appeal dismissed without opinion App.Div., 70 N.Y.S.2d 577. 'While the insured is in the military or naval service in time of war,' Bending v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 74 Ohio App. 182, 58 N.E.2d 71, 73.
Examples of 'result' cases, in which it was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.
...Standard Life Ins. Co., 161 P.2d 812, 813 (Cal.Ct.App.1945), aff'd, 28 Cal.2d 1, 168 P.2d 163 (1946); O'Daniell v. Missouri Ins. Co., 24 Ill.App.2d 10, 164 N.E.2d 78, 79 (Ill.App.Ct.1959); Myli v. American Life Ins. Co. of Des Moines, Iowa, 43 N.D. 495, 175 N.W. 631, 632 (1919); Laurendeau ......
-
Stucker v. College Life Ins. Co. of America, 19832
...Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company,[139 INDAPP 436] supra (1957), 388 Pa. 499, 131 A.2d 600; O'Daniell v. Missouri Insurance Co. (1959), 24 Ill.App.2d 10, 164 N.E.2d 78; Harding v. Pennsylvania Mut. Life Ins. Co. (1953), 373 Pa. 270, 95 A.2d 221. See also: Annot., 36 A.L.R.2d 101......
-
Continental Nat. Am. Group (Valley Forge Ins. Co.) v. Vaicunas
... ... Lakatos v. Prudence Mut. Cas. Co., 113 Ill.App.2d 310, 316, 252 N.E.2d 123; O'Daniell v. Missouri Ins. Co., 24 Ill.App.2d 10, 14, 164 N.E.2d 78. We find no ambiguity in the pertinent sections of the policy before us and therefore conclude that ... ...
-
Levy v. American Auto. Ins. Co.
...of a contract are clear and explicit, as in this instance, it is the duty of the court to enforce them. O'Daniell v. Missouri Ins. Co., 24 Ill.App.2d 10, 164 N.E.2d 78. Since plaintiffs claim no right to their judgments under any other provision of the contract and since the endorsement und......