Hutchison v. Hartford Life & Annuity Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 20 January 1897 |
| Citation | 39 S.W. 325 |
| Parties | HUTCHISON v. HARTFORD LIFE & ANNUITY INS. CO.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Hays county; H. Teichmueller, Judge.
Action by W. O. Hutchison, administrator of the estate of William A. Yeoman, deceased, against the Hartford Life & Annuity Insurance Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Franklin & Cobbs and Yale Hicks, for appellant. Coke & Coke, for appellee.
This is a suit by Hutchison, as administrator of the estate of William A. Yeoman, deceased, on a life insurance policy for the sum of $2,000. The defendant answered by general demurrer and general denial, and specially that it was not liable on the policy, because the first premium had not been paid in cash, as required by the contract, and because the deceased refused to accept the policy, and on account of the breach of certain warranties as to the age and residence of the assured. The case in the court below was tried before a jury, and they were in effect instructed to return a verdict in favor of the defendant, which was accordingly done, and upon this verdict judgment was rendered that the plaintiff recover nothing against the defendant, and that it go hence with its costs. It appears from the facts that the policy was issued and delivered by the appellee to the deceased, William Yeoman, insuring his life for the benefit of his estate in the sum of $2,000. Hutchison administered upon the estate, and found the policy among the effects of the deceased. We need not set out all the facts or make any finding upon all the issues raised in the court below, as, in our judgment, there is one fact, about which there is no controversy, that effectually disposes of the case in accord with the disposition made of it by the court below. In the application, which is made a part of the policy, the assured stated in writing that his place of residence was Kyle, Hays county, Tex. The evidence beyond dispute establishes the fact that at the time of his application, before, or since, he did not reside at Kyle, but was a farmer residing in the country about 12 miles from Kyle. The application in unequivocal terms warrants the literal truth of the statements made therein, and declares that the knowledge by any agent that any statement made by the assured was false shall not in any manner affect the right of the company to declare the policy void on account of the breach of the warranty, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Orlopp
...v. Insurance Co., 84 Tex. 61, 19 S. W. 301, and to the decision of one of our courts of civil appeals in the case of Hutchison v. Insurance Co., 39 S. W. 325, in which our supreme court refused a writ of error. Mr. Circuit Judge McCormick, a severe arraignment of such companies as to their ......
-
Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Wood
...I. Co. v. Pinson, 94 Tex. 553, 63 S. W. 531; Goddard v. Ins. Co., 67 Tex. 69, 71, 1 S. W. 906, 60 Am. Rep. 1; Hutchison v. Hartford L. & A. Ins. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 39 S. W. 325; W. O. W. v. Wernette (Tex. Civ. App.) 216 S. W. 669; Supreme Ruling, etc., v. Hansen (Tex. Civ. App.) 153 S. W.......
-
Merchants' Life Ass'n of United States v. Yoakum
... ... Insurance Co., 84 Tex. 61, 19 S.W. 301. ' ... Hutchison v. Insurance Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 39 S.W ... In many ... of ... of the United States in Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. v ... Union Trust Co., 112 U.S. 250, 5 Sup.Ct. 119, 28 L.Ed ... ...
-
Terry v. Texas Prudential Ins. Co.
...Tex. 25, 57 S. W. 635, 86 Am. St. Rep. 813; Delaware Ins. Co. v. Harris, 26 Tex. Civ. App. 537, 64 S. W. 867; Hutchison v. Hartford L. & A. Ins. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 39 S. W. 325; Northwestern Nat. Ins. Co. v. Mize (Tex. Civ. App.) 34 S. W. 670; Rockford L. I. Co. v. Tschiedel (Tex. Civ. Ap......