Guardian Life Insurance Company v. Dixon

Decision Date27 March 1922
Docket Number257
Citation240 S.W. 25,152 Ark. 597
PartiesGUARDIAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. DIXON
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Miller Circuit Court; George R. Haynie, Judge; affirmed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.

Four separate suits were brought by the beneficiaries against different life insurance companies to recover on policies of life insurance upon the life of Dr. B. E. Dixon and the cases were consolidated for the purpose of trial.

Dr Dixon had a policy for $ 5,000 in the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America which was for the benefit of his estate. Dr. Dixon had a policy for $ 1,000 in the Modern Order of Praetorians, and his minor child, Norman D. Dixon, was the beneficiary. Dr. Dixon had a policy for $ 3,000 in the Reserve Loan Life Insurance Company, and the policy named Norman D. Dixon, his minor child, as the beneficiary. Dr Dixon also had a policy in the Reserve Loan Life Insurance Company payable to his wife, Ura E. Dixon, and the policy had a commuted value of $ 7,629. Dr. B. E. Dixon died as the result of a pistol-shot wound at the office of A. L. Burford an attorney, in the State National Bank Building, Texarkana Ark., a few minutes before noon on the 6th day of December 1920. It appears from the record that the Buchanan-Vaughan Auto Company, of which Earl Buchanan is president and Carl Vaughan is secretary, had sold Dr. B. E. Dixon an automobile for which he had executed two notes for $ 1,000 each in part payment and had also turned over to the company his old automobile to be sold and the proceeds applied to the purchase price of the new one. Previous to this transaction, Dr. Dixon had given the Texarkana National Bank a mortgage on his old automobile for $ 500. The Buchanan-Vaughan Auto Company paid the mortgage of the bank and had the same transferred to it. A. L. Burford was attorney for the company, and had for collection the two $ 1,000 notes given for the new car and also the $ 500 note secured by the mortgage on the old car.

According to the testimony of A. L. Burford, at the request of Dr. Dixon he arranged for a meeting between Dr. Dixon and Vaughan and Buchanan at his office for the purpose of trying to adjust their differences. Dr. Dixon was insisting that they should take back his old car, and that he would give them back the new one. Carl Vaughan did most of the talking for the auto company. During the course of the conversation, he pressed Dr. Dixon to know why he had not told them when he let them have the old car that it was mortgaged to the bank. He told Dr. Dixon that the auto company would expect him to pay the $ 500 that the company had paid to secure a transfer of the mortgage from the bank to it. Mr. Vaughan pressed Dr. Dixon pretty closely about not informing him that the old car was mortgaged, and Dr. Dixon finally asked Mr. Vaughan if he wanted to make it a personal matter, saying if he did he was ready to do it. Dr. Dixon offered to pay the indebtedness against the old car and take it back, provided they would take back the new car and give him his notes. During the course of the conversation, Vaughan was sitting at the north end of a roll top desk, in the private office of the witness, between it and the corner of a table 8x13 1/2 feet. The table was about two feet longer than the desk and stood in front of the desk about four feet away from it and about six feet from the east wall of the room. Dr. Dixon was sitting two or three feet from the southeast corner of the table, being eight or ten feet from Vaughan. After Dr. Dixon had expressed himself as being ready to settle the matter in a personal way if Vaughan wanted to make it a personal matter, Vaughan made the statement that he was ready to settle it in a personal way if Dr. Dixon wanted to. Burford told them to hush up, that this was not the way to settle the controversy. They then talked further about the matter. Soon afterward Dr. Dixon rose up and drawing a pistol from his overcoat pocket, after taking a step or two toward Vaughan, fired at him. Vaughan rose up and started toward Dixon. The first shot missed Vaughan but the second one struck him. Dixon had an automatic twenty-five caliber, seven-shooting pistol. When Dixon fired the second shot, Vaughan was bent forward facing him. The second shot struck Vaughan at the edge of the hair in the front part of his head. Vaughan fell to the floor on the east side of the table and was rendered unconscious. He was not armed at the time. There were two doors in the private office of Burford. One of them led into a front room which was used by his stenographer, and the other opened into a hall of the building. The door leading into the hall had a spring lock and was usually kept closed. It was opened when the shooting occurred. Burford took hold of Dixon after he had fired the second shot and pushed him toward the hall door. He does not remember whether he pushed him entirely outside or not. Burford then passed into his stenographer's room and toward his stenographer's desk in order to get to the telephone. In going toward the telephone he had his back to the room in which the shooting occurred. He had not reached the telephone when he heard a third shot, and had not seen anything that had occurred in his private room while his back was to it going toward the telephone. When the third shot was fired, Burford turned around and saw Dr. Dixon about the time he fell to the floor. Dr. Dixon turned or twisted about the time he hit the floor, and almost immediately died. Buchanan ducked down on the floor when Dixon shot at Vaughan. He had gotten up off of the floor when Burford pushed Dr. Dixon towards the hall door. Buchanan did not leave the room until after the third shot was fired. Vaughan raised up after the shooting, but turned sick, and they laid him down on the floor again. There was a large rug on the floor of Burford's private office, and Dixon made no resistance at the time Burford took hold of him and led him towards the door.

According to the testimony of Earl Buchanan, they all rose to their feet when Dr. Dixon first drew his pistol. Dr. Dixon fired the first shot over Buchanan's shoulder and missed Vaughan. The second shot hit Vaughan, and he fell down on the floor. Burford then went to Dr. Dixon, put his arm around his shoulder and pushed him out of the room. Buchanan had ducked down on the floor when Dixon fired the second shot, and he got up just after Dr. Dixon went out of the room. After Dixon had been pushed from the room he walked back into it. He looked around at Mr. Vaughan on the floor and then placing the pistol to his head, pulled the trigger and shot himself. He just simply raised the gun to his head and fired. He immediately fell on his face on the floor. Burford and Dixon had no scuffle, and Dixon was led out of the room easily and gently. There was no more noise about it than the ordinary walking of two men. Buchanan knew the pistol had steel-jacketed bullets because an automatic pistol does not shoot anything else.

Other occupants of the building heard the shots and ran to Burford's office. They found Dr. Dixon lying on his back with his head pretty close to the door entering the stenographer's office and with his feet turned toward the east door of Burford's office leading into the hall. His head lay a foot or two from the door leading into the stenographer's office. The wound was in his hair on the right side of his head behind the ear. There was blood and apparently brains coming from it. The witnesses did not notice any pistol until after Dr. Lightfoot came in. Dr. Dixon had on his overcoat and the flap of it was lying over his right arm and hid it from view. When Dr. Lightfoot took hold of Dixon's right hand, the pistol fell from it. Vaughan was still down on the floor when the witnesses ran in after the shooting.

G. G. Pope, an attorney, had offices in the same building directly under those of A. L. Burford. He was a witness for the plaintiffs. According to his testimony he heard two quick shots; then a sort of scuffling around like they were moving furniture or something, and then he heard another shot. On cross-examination Pope stated that the impression he got was that some kind of furniture was moved; probably chairs or something like that.

According to other witnesses there were four bruises on the head and face of Dr. Dixon. There was a bruise below the eye and one above it. There was also a small bruise at the edge of the hair. The fourth bruise was above and a little to the left of the front bruise on the edge of his hair. The spots were dark, but there was not any swelling except a little puff under his eye. Experiments were made with the pistol found in the hand of Dr. Dixon by shooting it at a white cloth. One shot was fired at a distance of about four inches from the cloth, the next shot was six inches, the next eight, and the next twelve. The cloth was white and clean before the shots were fired. The first shot showed powder burns on the cloth and the other marks just powder. Similar experiments were made by firing the same pistol at a dressed chicken at close range and powder burns were also found on the body of the chicken.

The pistol wound was over the right ear of Dr. Dixon, a little behind and above it. The wound was a clean one. There was no blistering of the skin, and there were no powder burns. The flesh or skin was not scorched or burned, and the hair was not singed. The above is the testimony of the undertaker who had charge of the body of Dr. Dixon. He testified that in twenty years' experience he had seen two or three bodies a year where death had resulted from a pistol wound self-inflicted, and that the bodies showed powder burns; that in some instances the flesh was bleached or scorched, but there was always powder...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Smithco Engineering, Inc. v. International Fabricators, Inc.
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • June 16, 1989
    ...the forum, IFI has implicitly chosen the procedural law that accompanies the forum court. (Okl.App.1972). Cf. Guardian Life Ins. Co. v. Dixon, 152 Ark. 597, 240 S.W. 25 (1922), where the Texas attorney's fee statute was similar to the Arkansas one, so the Arkansas court enforced the Texas A......
  • Greenwell v. Davis
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • November 22, 2005
    ...11. See K.D.F., 878 S.W.2d at 595. In addition, Arkansas appears to be a cooperative jurisdiction. See Guardian Life Ins. Co. v. Dixon, 152 Ark. 597, 240 S.W. 25, 29 (1922); cf. Three Sisters Petroleum v. Langley, 348 Ark. 167, 72 S.W.3d 95, 103 12. The Fifth Circuit noted that a helicopter......
  • Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Sims
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • June 25, 1945
    ...is accidental, and the burden was upon the appellee company to overcome such presumption". An expression in Guardian Life Insurance Co. v. Dixon, 152 Ark. 597, 240 S.W. 25, 27, is that the presumption "stands until overthrown by evidence in favor of the insurer". And again: "The question pr......
  • Union Central Life Insurance Co. v. Sims
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • June 25, 1945
    ... 189 S.W.2d 193 208 Ark. 1069 Union Central Life Insurance Company v. Sims No. 4-7694 Supreme Court of Arkansas June 25, 1945 ...           Appeal ... 1075] appellee Company to overcome the ... presumption." An expression in Guardian Life ... Insurance Co. v. Dixon, 152 Ark. 597, 240 S.W ... 25, is that the presumption ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT