Life Ass'n of America v. Cravens

• Decision Date: 31 May 1875
• Citation: 60 Mo. 388
• Parties: THE LIFE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Appellant, v. JOHN N. CRAVENS AND FANNIE S. CRAVENS, Respondents.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

60 Mo. 388

THE LIFE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Appellant,

v.JOHN N. CRAVENS AND FANNIE S. CRAVENS, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

May Term, 1875.

Appeal from Ray Common Pleas.

J. W. & J. E. Black, with George W. Dunn, for Appellant.

I. It is expressly stipulated in the notes sued on, that they are given to secure the payment of the premium on the policy; and parol evidence that they were conditioned upon a loan of money to be obtained of the plaintiff, contradicted the notes, and such evidence was inadmissible. (Singleton vs. Fore, 7 Mo., 515; Ashley vs. Bird, 1 Mo., 640; Lane vs. Price, 5 Mo., 101; Woodward vs. McGaugh, 8 Mo., 161; Jones vs. Jeffries, 17 Mo., 577; 8 Mo., 391; 24 Mo., 509; 1 Greenl. Ev., 9 ed., §§ 275, 281-2.)

Donaldson & Farris, for Respondents.

HOUGH, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action against the defendants, as makers of three promissory notes, given by them to the plaintiff, for the first annual premium on a policy of insurance, issued by the plaintiff, on the life of the defendant, John L. Cravens, for the benefit of his wife, Fannie S. Cravens, and their children.

The defendants admitted the contract of insurance, and the execution of the notes sued on, but averred that said contract was made upon the express agreement that the plaintiff would loan to the defendant John L. Cravens, upon the insurance of his life and the execution of the notes as aforesaid, the sum of twenty-five hundred dollars, for as long a time as he would continue to pay the premiums on said policy, upon his furnishing satisfactory security for such loan; that defendant complied with all the directions prescribed by the plaintiff to be followed by him in order to obtain such loan, but that plaintiff, without any sufficient excuse, refused to loan to said defendant the sum aforesaid as agreed; that upon such refusal by plaintiff to make said loan he tendered to the plaintiff the policy received by him, and demanded the surrender of his notes, but plaintiff refused to return the same.

The plaintiff denied that the agreement to loan the defendant, John L. Cravens, the sum of twenty-five hundred dollars had any connection with the contract of insurance; but avered that it was subsequent to, and independent of, it, and that its refusal to make said loan resulted solely from the failure of the defendant to comply with the regulations of the company, required to be observed by him in order to obtain said loan, and denied that there was ever any offer to return the policy, or any demand for the notes.

Parol evidence was admitted by the court to show that the contract of insurance was entered into upon condition that the contract of loan should also be entered into. To the admission of which the plaintiff objected, for the reason that the notes sued upon expressed upon their face that the consideration for which they were given was the issuance of the policy of insurance aforesaid, and that such testimony was inadmissible to alter or vary the terms of a written contract.

We do not think the...