Hartford Life Ins Co v. Johnson
Decision Date | 14 April 1919 |
Docket Number | No. 291,291 |
Citation | 63 L.Ed. 722,249 U.S. 490,39 S.Ct. 336 |
Parties | HARTFORD LIFE INS. CO. v. JOHNSON |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. James C. Jones, George F. Haid, and James C. Jones, Jr., all of St. Louis, Mo., for petitioner.
Messrs. Matthew A. Fyke and Charles W. German, both of Kansas City, Mo., for respondent.
This is a suit, on a life insurance policy or certificate, in which judgment was rendered against the company, petitioner, successively, by three courts of the state of Missouri. The case is in this court on writ of certiorari granted on the asserted ground that the state Supreme Court failed and refused to give full faith and credit to the judgment and decree of a superior court of the state of Connecticut, and also to the petitioner's charter, 'a public record and act of the state of Connecticut,' in violation of the rights secured to it by article 4, section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
Respondent moves to dismiss the writ for want of jurisdiction.
The decree of the superior court of Connecticut, to which it is claimed full faith and credit was denied, was rendered in the case of Charles H. Dresser et al. v. Hartford Life Insurance Company, of Hartford, Conn., the petitioner. The character of this decree and the effect which must be given to it when properly pleaded and introduced in evidence in courts of other states are both sufficiently stated in Hartford Life Insurance Co. v. Ibs, 237 U. S. 662, 35 Sup. Ct. 692, 59 L. Ed. 1165, L. R. A. 1916A, 765, and in Hartford Life Insurance Co. v. Barber, 245 U. S. 146, 38 Sup. Ct. 54, 62 L. Ed. 208.
The respondent, on this motion to dismiss, does not seek to have the decisions in the cases cited modified, but asserts that the claim of right now made was not so 'set up or claimed' in the state courts that full faith and credit could be or was denied to the Dresser decree.
The judgment in this case in the trial court was rendered against the petitioner in September, 1909, and the decree in the Dresser Case was not rendered until six months later, in March, 1910. The latter decree was not set up in any pleading and was not introduced in evidence in this case. The only way in which it came to the notice of the Missouri courts was in argument and as an exhibit to a brief filed in the appellate courts and the Supreme Court of Missouri dealt with it in this single paragraph:
The jurisdiction of this court to review the final judgment or decree of the highest court of a state, in such a case as we have here, is defined in section 237 of the Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1156), as amended September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. 726, c. 448, § 2 [Comp. St. § 1214]), which provides that it shall be competent for this court, by certiorari to require any such cause to be certified to it for review when there is claimed in it any title, right, privilege or immunity under the Constitution of the United States and 'the decision is either in favor of or against the title right, privilege or immunity especially set up or claimed, by either party, under such Constitution.' It is the settled law that this provision means:
'That the claim must be asserted at the proper time and in the proper manner by pleading, motion or other appropriate action under the state system of pleading and practice, * * * and upon the question whether or not such a claim has been so asserted the decision of the state court is binding upon this court, when it is clear, as it is in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. O'Connor
...577, 35 L.Ed. 225; Duncan v. State of Missouri (1894), 152 U.S. 377, 14 S.Ct. 570, 38 L.Ed. 485; and Hartford Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson (1919), 249 U.S. 490, 39 S.Ct. 336, 63 L.Ed. 722. Undoubtedly, the trial court erred in the instant case in charging upon defendant's failure to There is no......
-
Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc
...91, 70 L.Ed. 229, or are applied in a discriminatory fashion to evade the federal claim, see, e.g., Hartford Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 249 U.S. 490, 493, 39 S.Ct. 336, 337, 63 L.Ed. 722. No such allegation is made in this case. 4. See, e.g., Dunmore v. McMillan, 396 Pa. 472, 152 A.2d 708; K......
-
Avery v. American Auto. Ins. Co.
...1109; Johnson v. Hartford Life Ins. Co., 166 Mo.App. 261, 148 S.W. 631, affirmed 271 Mo. 562, 197 S.W. 132, certiorari dismissed 249 U.S. 490, 63 L.Ed. 722; Veasman v. Lois Mut. Aid Assn., 214 Mo.App. 552, S.W. 392; Corbin v. Mystic Workers of the World, 226 S.W. 64; Watson v. Commonwealth ......
-
Baker v. Sovereign Camp, W. O. W.
... ... Sohoney v. Ry. Co., 132 S.W. 1039; Miller v ... Connor, 157 S.W. 81; Bealmer v. Hartford Ins ... Co., 220 S.W. 954; State ex rel. Wolfe v. Mo. Dental ... Board, 221 S.W. 70; Burns v ... 48 S.W.2d 890; State ex rel. Rose v. Webb City, 64 ... S.W.2d 597; Rechow v. Bankers Life Co., 73 S.W.2d ... 794; State ex rel. Karbe v. Bader, 78 S.W.2d 835; ... Ragsdale v. B. R. T., 80 ... Co. v. Barber, 245 U.S ... 146, 38 S.Ct. 54; Hartford Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, ... 248 U.S. 490, 39 S.Ct. 336; W. O. W. v. Shelton, 46 ... S.Ct. 207, 270 U.S. 628; Young v ... ...