Life Ins. Co. of Ga. v. Williams

Decision Date07 February 1964
Docket NumberNo. 2,No. 40507,40507,2
PartiesLIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF GEORGIA v. Henrietta WILLIAMS
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court

A verdict for the beneficiary of a policy insuring against death by 'external, violent and accidental means' was supported by evidence which authorized findings, that the insured pointed a rifle at his own head, that he did not intend to kill himself, and that he believed the rifle was not loaded, and which did not demand a finding that the insured had his finger on the trigger or that he pulled the trigger when the gun fired and killed him, or that he should have foreseen this consequence.

The plaintiff, beneficiary of a policy insuring the life of the deceased insured, sued the defendant insurer for the accidental death benefit payable in the event the death of the insured occurred 'as a direct result of, and independently of all other causes from, bodily injuries sustained * * * solely through external, violent and accidental means.' The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant assigns error on the judgment of the trial court overruling its motion for new trial on the general grounds.

Harris, Chance, McCracken & Harrison, J. Roy McCracken, Augusta, for plaintiff in error.

Abbot & Abbot, James C. Abbot, Louisville, for defendant in error.

HALL, Judge.

The following evidence, in summary, was developed at the trial: The witness Tommy Usry testified that he was a neighbor living about a half mile down the road from the deceased insured, Willie Ed Williams, and had been his friend for a year or two. They fished often and worked together in farm labor. Tommy was 14 and Willie Ed was 18 or 19 when he was killed. On the day Willie Ed was killed he and another boy came to Tommy's house. While the three were waiting for Tommy's sister to return to be asked if Tommy could go fishing, Tommy and Willie Ed were playfully scuffling over Tommy's knife and Tommy picked up the rifle, which was usually kept unloaded, and 'not seeing was there anything in the rifle,' pointed it toward Willie Ed. Willie Ed started making jokes and then pulled the rifle out of Tommy's hand and pointed it towards his own head and jokingly said 'I eat bullets' and 'the next thing I [Tommy] knowed, I heard the gun fire and he fell to the floor.' On cross examination Tommy stated he didn't remember whether or not Willie Ed had his fingers on the trigger or pulled the trigger when the gun went off, and did not remember whether or not he gave the following testimony at the coroner's hearing, but he could have: 'He sald he eats bullets and pointed the rifle toward his mouth and head and the rifle went off. He had his finger on the trigger when it went off.' Tommy testified that he did not remember making the following statement two months after Willie Ed's death, but admitted making the statement: '[Willie Ed] got the gun and put the barrel towards his head and said he ate bullets. He pulled the trigger and shot himself. I have never told anyone that I pulled the trigger of this gun. Willie Ed Williams pulled the trigger and my hand was not on the gun when the trigger was pulled.' This statement, which was in writing and signed by Tommy, was introduced in evidence, as was the report of the coroner's hearing. Tommy, as well as other witnesses, testified that Willie Ed was a happy, playful boy.

Georgia applies the generally accepted rule that to recover for death caused solely by 'external, violent, and accidental means' it is incumbent upon the beneficiary of an insurance policy to show that in the act which preceded the death something 'unforeseen, unexpected, or unusual occurred.' Thompson v. Prudential Ins. Co., 84 Ga.App. 214, 66 S.E.2d 119; Vance, Insurance 3d Ed. 947, § 181.

One of the few cases of an insured who pointed a gun at himself not intending to shoot himself is Thompson v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 84 Ga.App. 214, 66 S.E.2d 119, supra, upon which the defendant principally relies. In that case this court upheld a directed verdict for the defendant upon the following evidence: The insured 5 or 6 times the night before his death had successfully shown others how he could put one bullet in his gun and spin the cylinder around and make the bullet land on the bottom, and then pull the trigger without firing the bullet. On the nigth of his death the insured removed all the bullets from the gun but one, spun the cylinder just as he had the night before, and invited a witness to play 'Russian Roulette.' Then he put the pistol to his head and pulled the trigger. The gun fired ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Jackson v. National Life & Acc. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • September 27, 1973
    ...means' is determined by whether or not 'the insured should have foreseen the consequences of his acts.' Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Williams, 109 Ga.App. 264, 135 S.E.2d 925. I would not hold that death should have been foreseen as a result of taking penicillin administered by a physician; ......
  • John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Dutton
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • December 11, 1978
    ...must show that the act causing the insured's death was "unforeseen, unexpected, or unusual." Life Insurance Co. of Georgia v. Williams, 109 Ga.App. 264, 265, 135 S.E.2d 925, 926 (1964). Even when the insured is the aggressor in a situation, a claimant can still recover under an accidental d......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT