Frommelt v. The Travelers Insurance Co.
| Decision Date | 30 September 1921 |
| Docket Number | 22,174 |
| Parties | MARTHA A. FROMMELT v. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover on an accident insurance policy. The case was tried before Hale J., who at the close of the evidence denied defendant's alternative motion for a directed verdict or dismissal, and a jury which returned a verdict for $8,237.50. From an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
Death by accident sustained by evidence.
1. The evidence in this case is sufficient to sustain a finding that the death of the insured resulted from accidental means.
Evidence not conclusive.
2. The evidence is not conclusive that the death was due in part to pre-existing disease.
Notice of death to insurer excused.
3. The policy covering the case required that, in event of accidental death, immediate notice must be given to the company. This means within a reasonable time. Almost immediately after death the soliciting agent who negotiated the policy procured it and surrendered it to the company, as plaintiff claims without her authority. It was never returned to her though later demanded. Held, this and other circumstances in the case excused plaintiff from giving notice of death.
Dille Hoke, Krause & Faegre and L. N. Foster, for appellant.
J. H. Sapiro and Henry M. Farnam, for respondent.
This action was brought to recover on a policy of accident insurance issued to plaintiff's husband, Alfred Julius Frommelt. Plaintiff had a verdict. Defendant appeals.
1. The policy insured against loss resulting from "external, violent and accidental means." Defendant contends that the evidence fails to show that death resulted from such means. The short facts are as follows: About 1 a.m., January 16, 1918, deceased was, without premonition, taken sick at his home. He was suffering from a stricture of the urethra which prevented urination. Dr. Jones was called and arrived at 7 a.m. The evidence is in conflict, but there is competent evidence that, in passing a metal catheter through the urethra, Dr. Jones caused a severe laceration. No relief was afforded. At 11 a.m. a trocar was passed into the bladder through an incision below the umbilicus and through this means the bladder was drained. At 3 p.m. another operation, styled the perineal operation, was performed. This consisted of an incision at the point of obstruction and the insertion of a drainage tube through the urethra into the bladder. Frommelt grew rapidly worse and died January 23.
The testimony for plaintiff consisted of her own testimony, giving the history of the case and the symptoms shown and the testimony of two doctors, Dewar and Quinby, who performed an autopsy five months later. The result of the autopsy was more fruitful than the layman would perhaps expect after the lapse of time. The two doctors gave the opinion that an infection set in in the urethra, worked up to the kidneys and caused death. If this infection was caused by the laceration from use of the catheter at 7 a.m. it may fairly be said to be the result of accident. If arising from one of the operations later in the day, it cannot be said to be accidental. Dr. Quinby gave the opinion that it was the result of the laceration. As basis in part for his opinion he indicated that it was probable from the symptoms and facts developed that infection set in very early, that there were indications that it had set in before the operation in the afternoon, and, the much greater probability of infection from a laceration caused by a catheter at a place within, where there had been no cleansing or sterilization, than by an operation with a knife in the hands of an experienced surgeon, and at a place where cleansing and sterilization were easy. We think the evidence sustains a finding of accidental death. See Lewis v. Ocean Accident & Guaranty Corp. 224 N.Y. 18, 120 N.E. 56, 7 A.L.R. 1129.
2. The policy covers only cases of loss through external, violent and accidental means "independently of all other causes," and by its terms excludes cases of death or other loss caused wholly or partly by bodily...
To continue reading
Request your trial