Hawthorne v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 30 June 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 19.,19. |
| Citation | 280 N.W. 777,285 Mich. 329 |
| Parties | HAWTHORNE v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Action by Doloris Hawthorne against the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York corporation, to recover under a group insurance policy allegedly covering the life of plaintiff's husband. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; Allan Campbell, judge.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Samuel L. Weller, of Detroit (Albert Summer, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellant.
Bulkley, Ledyard, Dickinson & Wright, of Detroit (R. William Rogers, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellee.
Plaintiff, as wife of Roosevelt Hawthorne and beneficiary under a group insurance policy covering his life issued by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, brought suit against defendant to recover on the policy for his death. Roosevelt Hawthorne was insured under group policy No. 3200-G of defendant issued to the General Motors Corporation Subsidiaries and Affiliated Companies, among which was the Saginaw Malleable Iron Division of the General Motors Corporation by which Hawthorne was employed. A certificate was issued by defendant in which plaintiff was named as beneficiary.
Roosevelt Hawthorne applied for group insurance June 27, 1933, and authorized deduction of premiums from his pay each month. For the period from July 15, 1934, to July 28, 1934, $1.23 was deducted from his pay for insurance. The premium on the insurance was paid by the General Motors Corporation up to the end of August, 1934. Roosevelt Hawthorne had paid his insurance by pay deductions up until the end of August, 1934.
The foreman who had direct supervision of Hawthorne during his period of employment testified Hawthorne had been employed for approximately a year and that he ceased working in August, 1934. At that time he was pouring iron on the line, walked off the line at the Malleable Iron Division and was standing outside. The foreman told him to go back to work on the line, he refused to do so, and was then discharged. The foreman testified:
On cross-examination, he testified he did not know Hawthorne was sick at the time he discharged him or that he was subsequently attended by a doctor. He further testified it was not the first time Hawthorne had run off the line, he had told him to go back to work, and Hawthorne refused to do so.
According to the pleadings and a stipulation on file, Hawthorne's employment terminated August 10, 1934. The employer sent a report to the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company September 20, 1934, covering the month of August, 1934, dated September 5, 1934. The report did not indicate deceased's insurance was in force. Hawthorne died September 28, 1934, from stab wounds inflicted by another in the city of Saginaw. On the date of his death, he was not totally disabled from performing work for profit because of any injury or disease.
The group policy above mentioned provides:
‘Section 11. * * *
‘(a) The life insurance on any employee insured hereunder * * * shall cease automatically thirty-one (31) days after the date of termination of employment of such employee, except as provided in the next succeeding paragraph. * * *
‘As to the life insurance of any employee insured hereunder * * * cessation of active work shall be deemed to constitute the termination of his employment except that in case of the absence of such employee from active work on account of:
‘the employment of such employee may, for the purposes of the life insurance hereunder, be deemed to continue until terminated by the employer, as evidenced to the company by the employer, whether by notification or by cessation of premium payment on account of the life insurance hereunder on such employee.’
Plaintiff seeks to recover the face value of the policy ($2,000) from defendant.
The contract upon which plaintiff must rely is to be found in the policy and the applications of the employer and individual applicants for insurance, if any. 3 Comp.Laws 1929, § 12435.
Plaintiff sought to show deceased was ill at the time he was discharged, was confined to his bed for one week thereafter and attended by a doctor, and continued to be indisposed and unable to work for some time. The trial court rejected this testimony and upon the conclusion of the case directed the jury to return a verdict of no cause of action. Judgment was entered on this directed verdict and plaintiff appeals.
Plaintiff contends such testimony should not have been excluded because it would tend to prove deceased was absent from active work on account of illness and, therefore, would come within the exception provided for in the quoted portion of the policy above when he walked off the line and refused to return, telling the foreman he could not. It is plaintiff's contention that Hawthorne's insurance, having been paid up until the end of August, his insurance would continue for 31 days thereafter unless the employer had prior thereto notified the insurance company to terminate the insurance; that the testimony disclosed the notice of termination was sent on September 20, 1934, and under the circumstances, Hawthorne having died September 28, 1934, prior to the expiration of his insurance, his beneficiary is entitled to recover the amount of the insurance.
Defendant contends the first paragraph of the quoted portion of the policy controls the duration of insurance coverage; the employer had a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schipani v. Ford Motor Co.
...687, 273 N.W. 315 (1937); Adolph v. Cookware Co. of America, 283 Mich. 561, 569, 278 N.W. 687 (1938); Hawthorne v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 285 Mich. 329, 335, 280 N.W. 777 (1938); Toussaint v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, 408 Mich. 579, 292 N.W.2d 880 Under a contract terminabl......
-
Amerisure Mut. Ins. Co. v. Carey Transp., Inc.
... ... See ARS, 2008 WL 828112, at *14 (citing Mutuelle Generale Francaise Vie v. Life Ass. Co. of Pa., 688 F.Supp. 386, 397 n. 15 (N.D.Ill.1988) ("[O]ne Supreme Court decision ( ... Under the guise of interpretation it may not be reformed or modified.") (citing Lombardi v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 271 Mich. 265, 260 N.W. 160 (1935)). 17 ... Accordingly, ... thereunder construed together constitute the insurance contract") (citing, inter alia, Hawthorne v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 285 Mich ... Page 934 ... 329, 280 N.W. 777 (1938))) (footnote 6 ... ...
-
Clink v. Board of County Road Com'rs of Livingston County
...684, 273 N.W. 315 (1937), Adolph v. Cookware Co. of America, 283 Mich. 561, 278 N.W. 687 (1938), Hawthorne[96 MICHAPP 531] v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 285 Mich. 329, 280 N.W. 777 (1938), Ambrose v. Detroit Edison Co., 367 Mich. 334, 116 N.W.2d 726 (1962), Hernden v. Consumers Power Co., ......
-
Lineberger v. Security Life & Trust Co.
...policies are issued to the employer to insure employees. One who is not an employee is not insurable. ' Hawthorne v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 285 Mich. 329, 280 N.W. 777, 780. The Group Insurance Policy provides: 'Employees Eligible. * * * (b) Each employee in the employ of the Employer ......