Donahue v. The Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York

• Decision Date: 09 July 1917
• Docket Number: 1915
• Citation: 164 N.W. 50,37 N.D. 203
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

164 N.W. 50

37 N.D. 203

JOSEPH M. DONAHUE, Administrator of the Estate of Mary E. Donahue, Deceased, v. THE MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK

No. 1915

Supreme Court of North Dakota

July 9, 1917

Appeal from the District Court of Williams County, Frank E. Fisk Judge.

Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Lawrence & Murphy and Frederick L. Allen, for appellant.

A preponderance of the evidence means that which satisfies the conscience and carries conviction to an intelligent mind. Foulke v. Tahlmessinger, 8 Misc. 445, 28 N.Y.S. 684; North Chicago Street R. Co. v. Fitzgibbons, 180 Ill. 466, 54 N.E. 483.

Courts are not bound by the testimony of interested parties, but may look beyond it to the surrounding facts and circumstances to ascertain the true character of the transaction. Dows v Glaspel, 4 N.D. 251, 60 N.W. 60.

Where a number of witnesses testify positively to seeing a person intoxicated frequently, their testimony will not be rejected because a like number testify that they never saw such person intoxicated. In the one case it is positive, and in the other negative, evidence. Brockway v. Mutual Ben. L. Ins Co. 9 F. 249; Richards v. Richards, 19 Ill.App 465; Walton v. Walton, 34 Kan. 195, 8 P. 110; Dunlap v. Snyder, 17 Barb. 561; Boylan v. Meeker, 28 N.J.L. 274.

Ordinarily a witness who testifies affirmatively to a given fact is to be preferred to one who testifies in a negative manner. 2 Moore, Facts, §§ 1192, 1193; Wickham v. Chicago & N.W. R. Co. 95 Wis. 25, 69 N.W. 982, 1 Am. Neg. Rep. 198; Ryan v. La Cross City R. Co. 108 Wis. 122, 83 N.W. 710; Patterson v. Gaines, 6 How. 550, 12 L.Ed. 553.

The contract for insurance was executory, and the liability of the insured depended upon the actual, and not the mere apparent, good health of the insured when the first premium was paid. Thompson v. Travelers' Ins. Co. 11 N.D. 274, 91 N.W. 75, 13 N.D. 444, 101 N.W. 900; Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. v. Howle, 62 Ohio St. 204, 56 N.E. 908; Plumb v. Penn Mut. L. Ins. Co. 108 Mich. 94, 65 N.W. 611; Powers v. North Eastern Mut. L. Asso. 50 Vt. 630.

In an application for insurance it is wholly immaterial whether the applicant knew of the existence of the disease, because he agreed that it did not exist. Tobin v. Modern Woodmen, 126 Mich. 161, 85 N.W. 47; Baumgart v. Modern Woodmen, 85 Wis. 546, 55 N.W. 713; Boyle v. North Western Mut. Relief Asso. 95 Wis. 312, 70 N.W. 351; Connecticut Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Pyle, 44 Ohio St. 19, 58 Am. Rep. 781, 4 N.E. 465; Volker v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 1 Misc. 374, 21 N.Y.S. 456; Miles v. Connecticut Mut. L. Ins. Co. 3 Gray, 580; AEtna L. Ins. Co. v. France, 91 U.S. 510, 23 L.Ed. 401; Jeffries v. Economical Mut. Ins. Co. 22 Wall. 47, 22 L.Ed. 833; Fidelity Mut. Life Asso. v. Jeffords, 53 L.R.A. 193, 46 C. C. A. 377, 107 F. 402; Barker v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 188 Mass. 542, 74 N.E. 945; Gallant v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 167 Mass. 79, 44 N.E. 1073; Woodmen of World v. Locklin, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 486, 67 S.W. 331; Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. v. Willis, 37 Ind.App. 48, 76 N.E. 560; Brooks v. Munice & P. Traction Co. 176 Ind. 298, 95 N.E. 1006; 25 Cyc. 719, 725, notes 26, 62; Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. v. Howle, 62 Ohio St. 204, 56 N.E. 908, 68 Ohio St. 614, 68 N.E. 4; Packard v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 72 N.H. 1, 54 A. 287; Roe v. National L. Ins. Co. 137 Iowa 696, 17 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1148, 115 N.W. 500; Cable v. United States L. Ins. Co. 49 C. C. A. 216, 111 F. 19; Reese v. Fidelity Mut. Life Asso. 111 Ga. 482, 36 S.E. 637.

A charge to the effect that no recovery can be had if, on the date of the policy, or when it was delivered, assured was not in good sound health, states the law. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. v. Howle, 68 Ohio St. 614, 68 N.E. 4; Roe v. National L. Ins. Asso. 137 Iowa 696, 17 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1151, 115 N.W. 500; Packard v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 72 N.H. 1, 54 A. 287; Cable v. United States L. Ins. Co. 49 C. C. A. 216, 111 F. 19; Powell v. Prudential Ins. Co. 153 Ala. 611, 45 So. 208; Thompson v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 99 N.Y.S. 1006; British Equitable Ins. Co. v. Great Western R. Co. 38 L. J. Ch. N. S. 314, 20 L. T. N. S. 422, 17 Week. Rep. 561; Reese v. Fidelity Mut. L. Asso. 111 Ga. 482, 36 S.E. 637; Maloney v. Northwestern Masonic Aid Asso. 8 A.D. 575, 40 N.Y.S. 918; Thompson v. Travelers' Ins. Co. 13 N.D. 444, 101 N.W. 900; North Western L. Asso. v. Findley, 29 Tex. Civ. App. 494, 68 S.W. 695.

Stipulations in the policy to the effect that the policy shall not take effect unless delivered to the insured while he is in good health, and similar provisions, are valid. Bell v. Missouri State L. Ins. Co. 166 Mo.App. 390, 149 S.W. 33; Perry v. Security Life & Annuity Co. 150 N.C. 143, 63 S.E. 679; Murphy v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 106 Minn. 112, 118 N.W. 355; Connecticut General L. Ins. Co. v. Mullen, 43 L.R.A.(N.S.) 725, 118 C. C. A. 345, 197 F. 299; Mohr v. Prudential Ins. Co. 32 R. I. 177, 78 A. 554.

An insurance company computes its liability from the statements and showing made in the application. Gallant v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 167 Mass. 79, 44 N.E. 1073; British Equitable Ins. Co. v. Great Western R. Co. 38 L. J. Ch. N. S. 314, 20 L. T. N. S. 422, 17 Week. Rep. 561; Thompson v. Travelers' Ins. Co. 13 N.D. 444, 101 N.W. 900.

If there is any change in the condition of health of the applicant pending negotiations for insurance, such fact should be made known, and its concealment is fraud. Satterlee v. Modern Brotherhood, 15 N.D. 92, 106 N.W. 561; Cable v. United States L. Ins. Co. 49 C. C. A. 216, 111 F. 19; M'Lanahan v. Universal Ins. Co. 1 Pet. 170, 7 L.Ed. 98; Piedmont & A. L. Ins. Co. v. Ewing, 92 U.S. 377, 23 L.Ed. 610; Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. McElroy, 28 C. C. A. 365, 49 U.S. App. 548, 83 F. 631; Traill v. Baring, 4 De G. J. & S. 318, 46 Eng. Reprint, 941, 33 L. J. Ch. N. S. 521, 10 Jur. N. S. 377, 4 Giff. 485, 66 Eng. Reprint, 797, 12 Week. Rep. 678, 10 L. T. N. S. 215; Watson v. Delafield, 2 Caines, 224, 1 Johns. 150, 2 Johns. 526.

Palmer, Craven & Burns, John E. Greene and Chas. J. Fisk, for respondent.

"This policy and the application herefor, a copy of which is indorsed hereon, and attached hereto, constitute the entire contract between the parties hereto." Such is the provision of the policy in this case, and therefore the report of the medical examiner forms no part of the insurance contract. 25 Cyc. 754, and cases cited.

The above clause was put into the policy by defendant, originated with and was dictated by defendant, and should be most strongly construed against defendant. 25 Cyc. 739, 799; Harrington v. Mutual L. Ins. Co. 21 N.D. 447, 34 L.R.A.(N.S.) 373, 131 N.W. 246.

He who seeks to avoid the effect of a solemn written obligation on the ground of fraud has the burden of proof as to such issue. Pope v. Bailey-Marsh Co. 29 N.D. 355, 151 N.W. 18, 8 N. C. C. A. 516, and cases cited; Schofield v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 79 Vt. 161, 64 A. 1107, 8 Ann. Cas. 1152.

Good-faith statements, although warranties, will not avoid the policy. Schofield v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 79 Vt. 161, 64 A. 1107, 8 Ann. Cas. 1152; Moulor v. American Ins. Co. 111 U.S. 335, 28 L.Ed. 447, 4 S.Ct. 466; Globe Mut. L. Ins. Asso. v. Wagner, 188 Ill. 133, 52 L.R.A. 649, 80 Am. St. Rep. 169, 58 N.E. 970; Fidelity Mut. L. Ins. Asso. v. Jeffords, 53 L.R.A. 193, 46 C. C. A. 377, 107 F. 402; Rasicot v. Royal Neighbors, 18 Idaho 85, 29 L.R.A.(N.S.) 433, 138 Am. St. Rep. 180, 108 P. 1048; Modern Woodmen Acci. Asso. v. Shryock, 54 Neb. 250, 39 L.R.A. 826, 74 N.W. 607; Dimick v. Metropolitan L. Ins. Co. 69 N.J.L. 384, 62 L.R.A. 774, 55 A. 291; Suravitz v. Prudential Ins. Co. 244 Pa. 582, L.R.A.1915A, 273, 91 A. 495; AEtna L. Ins. Co. v. Rehlaender, 68 Neb. 284, 94 N.W. 129, 4 Ann. Cas. 251.

A policy of insurance takes effect upon its date, if delivered. Harrington v. Mutual L. Ins. Co. 21 N.D. 447, 34 L.R.A.(N.S.) 373, 131 N.W. 246; 25 Cyc. 742; Union Ins. Co. v. American F. Ins. Co. 107 Cal. 328, 28 L.R.A. 692, 48 Am. St. Rep. 140, 40 P. 431; Rayburn v. Pennsylvania Casualty Co. 138 N.C. 379, 107 Am. St. Rep. 548, 50 S.E. 762; Anderson v. Mutual L. Ins. Co. 164 Cal. 712, 130 P. 726, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 103.

Defendant is estopped to assert that its solemn contract is void. The delivery of the policy, in the absence of fraud, is conclusive that the contract is completed. Griffith v. New York Life Ins. Co. 101 Cal. 627, 40 Am. St. Rep. 96, 36 P. 113; Berliner v. Travelers Ins. Co. 121 Cal. 451, 53 P. 922; Globe Mut. L. Ins. Asso. v. Meyer, 118 Ill.App. 155; Sheldon v. Atlantic F. & M. Ins. Co. 26 N.Y. 460, 84 Am. Dec. 213; Hartford F. Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 9 Ann. Cas. 224, note and cases cited.

Defendant claiming fraud has the burden of proving same. Sprott v. Ross, 16 Sc. Sess. Cas. 1st series, 1145; Thompson v. Travelers Ins. Co. 11 N.D. 274, 91 N.W. 75, 13 N.D. 444, 101 N.W. 900; Fidelity Mut. L. Ins. Asso. v. Jeffords, 53 L.R.A. 197, 46 C. C. A. 377, 107 F. 402.

"An acknowledgment in a policy of the receipt of premium is conclusive evidence of its payment so far as to make the policy binding, notwithstanding any stipulation therein that it shall not be binding until the premium is actually paid." Harrington v. Mutual L. Ins. Co. 21 N.D. 447, 34 L.R.A.(N.S.) 373, 131 N.W. 246; Hartford F. Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 9 Ann. Cas. 224, note.

The certificate of death furnished by the doctor, and the statement therein as to the cause of death, are not conclusively binding. They are mere preliminary steps in proof of a fact, and when offered are hearsay and of no value as evidence. Comp. Laws 1913, § 6542; Messersmith v. Supreme Lodge, K. of P. 31 N.D. 163, 153 N.W. 989; John Hancock Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Dick, 44 L.R.A. 853, note.

"Pregnancy in the case of a female applicant is not a...