Krug v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York

• Decision Date: 27 January 1941
• Citation: 149 S.W.2d 393,235 Mo.App. 1224
• Parties: HELEN D. KRUG, RESPONDENT, v. THE MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT
• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals

149 S.W.2d 393

235 Mo.App. 1224

HELEN D. KRUG, RESPONDENT, v. THE MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City

January 27, 1941

Appeal from Circuit Court of Jackson County.--Hon. Allen C Southern, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Judgment affirmed.

William C. Michaels, Robert E. Coleberd and Albert L. Reeves, Jr. for appellant.

Louis W. Dawson and Michaels, Blackmar, Newkirk, Eager & Swanson of Counsel.

(1) The trial court erred in refusing to give defendant's requested instruction lettered "B" at the close of the whole case, such instruction being in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence for the reasons: (a) Plaintiff did not make a submissible case. There was not any evidence insured suffered an injury from a fall caused by the accidental breaking of a stepladder, which injury was the direct cause of death. Phillips v. Travelers Ins Co., 288 Mo. 175, 185, 231 S.W. 947; Christianson v. Met. Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 102 S.W.2d 682, 685; Tillotson v. Travelers Ins. Co., 304 Mo. 487, 263 S.W. 819; Met. Life Ins. Co. v. Hoch (6th C. C. A.), 94 F.2d 966, 968; Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Saxon, 284 U.S. 458; Wallace v. Standard Accident Ins. Co. (6th C. C. A.), 63 F.2d 211; Wright v. Order of United Commercial Travelers (Mo. App.), 174 S.W. 833; Jones v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. and The Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. (8 C. C. A.), 113 F.2d 873. (b) Plaintiff's case of an alleged accident to the insured is based upon inferences piled upon inferences. Phillips v. Travelers Insurance Co., 288 Mo. 175, 185, 231 S.W. 947; Cardinale v. Kemp (Mo.), 274 S.W. 437, 448; Harding v. Federal Life (Mo. App.), 34 S.W.2d 198; Raw v. Maddox, 230 Mo.App. 515, 93 S.W.2d 282; Ballinger v. St. L.-San Francisco Ry. Co., 334 Mo. 720, 67 S.W.2d 985; Fryer v. Railway Co. (Mo.), 63 S.W.2d 47; Markley v. K. C. Southern Ry. Co. (Mo.), 338 Mo. 436, 90 S.W.2d 409. (c) Plaintiff's evidence, Exhibit 86 shows that insured's death was caused by cerebral hemorrhage and the disease of leukemia. Farage v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 81 S.W.2d 344, 346; State ex rel. v. Trimble (en banc), 303 Mo. 266, 259 S.W. 1052; Grey v. Order of Foresters (Mo. App.), 196 S.W. 779; Smiley v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 52 S.W.2d 12; Stephens v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 190 Mo.App. 673, 176 S.W. 253; Otto v. Met. Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 72 S.W.2d 811. (d) If plaintiff's evidence was sufficient to support her theory of accidental death, which we deny, then plaintiff's evidence shows insured's death could or might have been caused by either an accidental injury or disease. Adelsberger v. Sheehy, 332 Mo. 954, 59 S.W.2d 644; Pedigo v. Roseberry, 340 Mo. 724, 102 S.W.2d 600; Warner v. St. L. & Meramec River Ry. Co., 178 Mo. 125, 77 S.W. 67; Kimmie v. Terminal Railroad Assn., 334 Mo. 596, 66 S.W.2d 561; Bates v. Brown Shoe Co., 342 Mo. 411, 116 S.W.2d 31; Lappin v. Prebe et al. (Mo.), 131 S.W.2d 511; Christianson v. Met. Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 102 S.W.2d 682. (2) The court erred in giving plaintiff's instruction numbered 1 for the following reasons: (a) It requires facts to be found by the jury which are not supported by the evidence, namely: (1) that insured on December 21, 1937, was caused to fall from a stepladder; (2) that such fall was caused by the breaking of the stepladder; (3) that insured sustained bodily injury which was the direct cause of death January 1, 1938. Putnam v. Universal Granite Works et al. (Mo. App.), 122 S.W.2d 389, 391; Birdsong v. Jones, 225 Mo.App. 242, 30 S.W.2d 1094; Clarke v. Jackson, 342 Mo. 537, 116 S.W.2d 122; Cory et al. v. Interstate Securities Co. (Mo. App.), 99 S.W.2d 861; Degonia v. Railroad, 224 Mo. 564, 123 S.W. 807; State ex rel. v. Ellison, 270 Mo. 645, 195 S.W. 722; Steward v. Wenger (Mo. App.), 125 S.W.2d 537; Gundelach v. Compagnie General Transatlantique (Mo.), 41 S.W.2d 1. (b) This instruction permits the jury to reach a verdict by guesswork, speculation and conjecture. State ex rel. Bank v. Hostetter et al. (Mo., en banc), 125 S.W.2d 835, 838; Fryer v. Railroad (Mo.), 63 S.W.2d 47. (c) This instruction, although it purports to cover the entire case and authorizes a verdict for plaintiff, does not require the jury to find certain facts necessary to plaintiff's right of recovery, namely; the injury insured sustained which directly caused his death and the fact that the death was not caused directly or indirectly by disease--the disease of leukemia. Finley v. Continental Insurance Company (Mo. App.), 299 S.W. 1107; Toonnies v. Public Service Co. (Mo. App.), 67 S.W.2d 818; Macklin v. Fogel Construction Co., 326 Mo. 38, 31 S.W.2d 14, 19; Pollock v. Mo. State Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 123 S.W.2d 212; Long v. F. W. Woolworth Co. (Mo. App.), 109 S.W.2d 85; Pandjiris v. Oliver Cadillac Co., 339 Mo. 726, 98 S.W.2d 978. (d) This instruction is erroneous for the additional reason that it entirely ignores the defense that death was caused by a cerebral hemorrhage and the disease of leukemia. Carroll v. Union Marine Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 249 S.W. 691, 692; Walker v. Bianchi et al. (Mo. App.), 276 S.W. 1044; Bouligny v. Met. Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 133 S.W.2d 1094; Koury v. Home Insurance Co. (Mo. App.), 57 S.W.2d 750; Tobin Construction Co. v. Davis et al. (Mo. App.), 81 S.W.2d 474; Jones Store Co. v. Kelley et al. (Mo. App.), 36 S.W.2d 681; Ormsby v. Laclede Farmers Mutual Fire & Maritime Ins. Co., 98 Mo.App. 371. (3) The court erred in giving plaintiff's instruction numbered "3" for the following reasons: (a) It requires the jury to find facts not supported by the evidence, namely; that even though the insured had disease and physical infirmity, he would not have died of disease or physical infirmity at the time he did except for the accidental injury. Degonia v. Railway Co., 224 Mo. 564, 123 S.W. 807; Rosenweig v. Wells, 308 Mo. 617, 627, 273 S.W. 1071; Karte v. Brockman Mfg. Co., 247 S.W. 417; Kitchen v. Schueter Mfg. Co., 323 Mo. 1179, 1195, 20 S.W.2d 686. (b) It does not require the jury to find what injury insured suffered nor does it require the jury to find what disease or physical infirmity the insured had which would not have caused his death January 1, 1938. Markley v. K. C. So. Ry. Co., 338 Mo. 436, 90 S.W.2d 409, 413; Evans v. Massman Const. Co., 343 Mo. 632, 122 S.W.2d 924. (c) It is argumentative and a comment on plaintiff's evidence of an alleged accidental injury to the insured. Dohring v. Kansas City (Mo.), 81 S.W.2d 943, 947-8; Gleason v. Texas Co. (Mo.), ___ S.W. ___; Cannon v. S. S. Kresge Co. (Mo. App.), 116 S.W.2d 559; Dick v. Puritan Pharmaceutical Co. (Mo. App.), 46 S.W.2d 941; Fowlker v. Stevens (Mo.), 114 S.W.2d 997. (4) The court erred in not sustaining defendant's objections to the hypothetical question asked by plaintiff's counsel to witness, Dr. Hoxie. It was not a proper hypothetical question for the reason it included facts not in evidence, namely; that on the evening of December 21, 1937, insured fell from a six-foot stepladder in front of his residence as the result of the breaking of the ladder; that in the fall he received contusion and abrasions on the left leg and a bruise on the left side of the chest and abdomen in the region of the spleen. Oesterle v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. (Mo.), 141 S.W.2d 780, 782; Root v. K. C. So. Ry. Co., 195 Mo. 348, 92 S.W. 621; Bennett v. Myers (Mo. App.), 21 S.W.2d 943; Ridenour v. Wilcox Mines Co., 164 Mo.App. 576, 147 S.W. 852; Russ v. Wabash Ry. Co., 112 Mo. 45, 20 S.W. 472; Streeter v. Washington Fidelity Natl. Ins. Co., 229 Mo.App. 33, 68 S.W.2d 889.

Woodruff & Gard for respondent.

(1) Plaintiff's evidence makes a case for the jury. (a) The fact of external injury was proved by direct, not circumstantial evidence. (b) The only conclusion fairly to be drawn from the evidence is that the stepladder broke, causing insured to fall while using it for the purpose for which it was left with him, and that his injuries were the result thereof. Accident Insurance, 1 C. J. 495; Meadows v Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co., 129 Mo. 76, 31 S.W. 578; Woelfle v. Connecticut Mutual Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 112 S.W.2d 865; London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Woelfle, 83 F.2d 325, (C. C. A. 8th, 1936); Frost v. Central Business Men's Ass'n (Mo. App.), 246 S.W. 628; Svenson v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York, 87 F.2d 441, (C. C. A. 8th); Columbian Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Comfort, 84 F.2d 291; Killam v. Travelers Protective Ass'n of America (Mo. App.), 127 S.W.2d 772; Spencer v. National Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 200 S.W. 80. (c) The "so-called Rule" against inference on inference has no application because each conclusion of fact has a separate foundation in the evidence. Wills v. Berberich's Delivery Co., 134 S.W.2d 125; Wigmore on Evidence (3 Ed.), sec. 41; Morris v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 341 Mo. 821, 109 S.W.2d 1222; Young v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 32 F.Supp. 389. (d) Plaintiff's Exhibit 86 is evidence of the conflicting and wavering attitude of Dr. O'Donnell. Aeolian Co. of Mo. v. Boyd (Mo. App.), 138 S.W.2d 692; Cope v. Central States Life Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 56 S.W.2d 602; Ryan v. Metropolitan Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 30 S.W.2d 190; Burgess v. Pan-American Ins. Co. (Mo.), 230 S.W. 315; Bruck v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 194 Mo.App. 529, 185 S.W. 753; Jones v. Chicago R. I. & P. Ry. Co. (Mo.), 108 S.W.2d 94; Life Insurance, 37 C. J. sec. 316; Evidence, 23 C. J., sec. 1793. (e) This is not a case where the plaintiff's evidence shows that either accident or disease may have caused death, but the evidence supports the verdict of death from accidental injury. Smith v. Washington Nat. Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 91 S.W.2d 169; Rieger v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York (Mo. App.), 110 S.W.2d 878; Roberts v. Woodmen...