Jacobs v. New York Life Insurance Co.

• Decision Date: 19 February 1894
• Citation: 15 So. 639,71 Miss. 658
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: REGINA M. JACOBS v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE CO

15 So. 639

71 Miss. 658

REGINA M. JACOBS v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE CO

Supreme Court of Mississippi

February 19, 1894

October 1893

FROM the circuit court of Copiah county, HON. J. B. CHRISMAN Judge.

Action by Regina M. Jacobs against the New York Life Insurance Company, a corporation domiciled in New York, but doing business in this state. The declaration alleges that on July 4, 1892, Herman Jacobs, the husband of plaintiff, applied in writing to the defendant company, through its agent at Natchez, Miss. for two policies of insurance for $ 5,000 each on the life of said Herman Jacobs, payable to plaintiff at his death; that said Jacobs was examined by the medical examiner of the defendant company, and was pronounced a good risk; that thereupon he paid to the agent of defendant $ 195 as the first premium for such insurance; that the agent gave him a receipt in the name of the company, whereby it undertook to insure the life of said Jacobs upon the conditions therein named; that the agent was duly authorized to accept said application and give the receipt; that the assured died suddenly fourteen days after the receipt was delivered to him, and three days before the company declined the application; that the fact of death was immediately communicated to defendant in New York, and that it declined arbitrarily and without any sufficient reason or excuse, to issue the policy. The application and receipt were filed as a part of the declaration. Plaintiff averred that, by virtue of the payment of said premium and the issuance of said receipt based on the application and medical examination, the defendant became liable to pay plaintiff the said sum of $ 10,000.

The following is the receipt filed as an exhibit to the declaration:

"73053. CONDITIONAL RECEIPT. Amount, $ 195.00.

"Received at Natchez, state of' Mississippi, this fourth day of July, 1892, of Herman Jacobs, the sum of one hundred ninety-five dollars, on the following express conditions agreements and understanding:

"1. That, if an application made by him this day to the New York Life Insurance Company for an insurance of ten thousand dollars, to take effect from this day, is approved and accepted by said company, and its policy issued, said sum shall be applied in payment of the first semi-annual premium on said insurance.

"2. That, if said application is not approved and accepted. said company shall incur no liability thereunder, and said sum shall be returned on surrender of this receipt.

"3. That, if a policy is not received within twenty days, a statement of the facts should be mailed to the home office, and, if not received within thirty days, the application must be considered declined, and claim made for return of said sum.

"4. That no agent has power, in behalf of said company, to make any contract or to issue a permit for residence, travel or occupation.

"5. That this receipt is not valid if any alterations or erasures are made in the printed form.

"No. 922, Ed., June, 1888. SIMON MAYER."

Among other things, the application for insurance contained the following stipulation:

"2. That, inasmuch as only the officers at the home office of said company, in the city of New York, have authority to determine whether or not a policy shall issue on any application, and as they act on the written statements and representations referred to, no statements, representations, promises or information made or given by or to the person soliciting or taking this application for a policy, or by or to any other person, shall be binding on said company, or in any manner affect its rights, unless such statements, representations, promises or information be reduced to writing and presented to the officers of said company at the home office in this application."

Defendant's demurrer to the declaration was sustained. Plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Mayes & Harris, for appellant.

1. It is claimed that, by the terms of the receipt and other papers then executed, this temporary contract was made: (1) That the applicant was thereby insured until the company, at its home office in New York, should finally act on the application; (2) that, if the application should be declined (not arbitrarily), the company was to be at no further risk, and the premium was to be returned; (3) that, if the application was finally and permanently accepted by the company, the payment made was to be finally applied in payment of the first semi-annual premium.

Our contention is that, pending the question of final acceptance, the company carried the risk, and that the death before rejection terminated the power of the company to make any rejection.

The contract was to be performed in New York. Parties may, by contract, subject their obligations to the laws of another state,...