Des Moines Life Ins. Co. v. Seifert

• Decision Date: 23 June 1904
• Citation: 210 Ill. 157,71 N.E. 349
• Parties: DES MOINES LIFE INS. CO. v. SEIFERT.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

210 Ill. 157

71 N.E. 349

DES MOINES LIFE INS. CO.

v.SEIFERT.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 23, 1904.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District.

Bill by the Des Moines Life Insurance Company against Bertha Seifert. From a judgment of the Appellate Court, affirming a decree for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Geo. R. Sanderson and Benj. M. Shaffner, for appellant.

Coburn & Case, for appellee.

This was a bill in chancery, filed by the appellant against the appellee in the superior court of Cook county, for the surrender and cancellation of a policy of insurance issued by appellant upon the life of Ernst Seifert, in which appellee was named as beneficiary, on the ground the policy was obtained by means of the false and fraudulent representations made by Seifert to the appellant at the time the policy was issued. The bill was amended, an answer and replication were filed, and upon the motion of the appellee to set down the case for hearing the court found that the bill as amended set forth no facts giving a court of chancery jurisdiction, and of its own motion entered a decree dismissing the amended bill for want of equity, which decree has been affirmed by the Appellate Court for the First District, and a further appeal has been prosecuted to this court. The material allegations of the bill are that on November 3, 1899, upon the written application of Ernst Seifert, the policy was issued; that Seifert in said application made false and untrue statements with regard to his use of intoxicating liquors, and in regard to his being intoxicated during the three years prior to his application, and also with regard to the physicians who had attended upon or been consulted by him during that period; that the appellant relied upon the truth of said statements, which were warranted by said Seifert to be true; that Seifert died July 8, 1902, of cardiac dilatation and chronic alcoholism; that appellant, on August 8, 1902, first ascertained that said statements were false, and on August 22, 1902, filed its bill to cancel the policy. The policy contained a clause that suit must be brought thereon within one year of the time of the death of the insured.

HAND, J. (after stating the facts).

The controlling question in this case is, has a court of equity jurisdiction to entertain a bill by an insurance company against a beneficiary named in its policy, after the death of the insured, to cancel a policy, the issuance of which is alleged to have been obtained by the false and untrue statements of the insured? We are of the opinion it has not, for the reason the insurance company has a plain and adequate defense at law to a suit upon the policy. Douglass v. Martin, 103 Ill. 25;Gore v. Kramer, 117 Ill. 176, 7 N. E. 504;Black v. Miller, 173 Ill. 489, 50 N. E. 1009;Vannatta v. Lindley, 198 Ill. 40, 64 N. E. 735,92 Am. St. Rep. 270;Cable v. United States Life Ins. Co., 24 Sup. Ct. 74, 48 L. Ed. 188. In the case of Gore v. Kramer, supra, the general rule is thus stated (page 182, 117 Ill., page 507, 7 N. E.): ‘The rule has been often repeated inths court that a party can have no standing in a court of equity who has a plain and adequate remedy or defense at law.’ In Black v. Miller, supra, the cancellation and surender of a promissory note which was past due was sought to be obtained upon the ground of its alleged invalidity. It was held the bill could not...