Linnen v. Commercial Cas. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 October 1929 |
| Docket Number | 12749. |
| Parties | LINNEN v. COMMERCIAL CASUALTY CO. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Charleston County; W. H Townsend, Judge.
Action by Martha Linnen against the Commercial Casualty Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
J. B McLaughlin and D. M. Winter, both of Columbia, for appellant.
Hamer & Crosland, of Charleston, for respondent.
This action is based on a policy of accident insurance issued by the defendant company to one William Waites. It was provided in the policy that, in case of death of the insured through external, violent, and accidental means, the beneficiary named therein, Martha Linnen, mother of Waites, would be indemnified in the sum of $500. The policy also contained the following provision, pertinent to the decision of this case:
"In the event of any claim for *** death *** resulting from accident *** due directly or indirectly *** to injuries intentionally inflicted upon the insured by any person for private or personal reasons or otherwise *** benefits paid shall be ten (10%) per cent of the benefits otherwise paid under this contract."
The insured was killed at Jacksonville, Fla., on August 31, 1927 and thereafter in due time the beneficiary made the required proof of death, but the company refused to pay. This action was then brought by the plaintiff to recover the amount of the policy. The defendant, answering the complaint, denied that the death of the insured was accidental, and pleaded that it was brought about by injuries intentionally inflicted upon him by a third person, for which the defendant was not responsible.
The case was tried before his honor, Judge Townsend, who refused the defendant's motion for a directed verdict. The jury found for the plaintiff $500.
There are several exceptions, but the appeal presents one question only: Should the trial judge under the testimony have directed a verdict for the defendant?
The undisputed evidence of eyewitnesses of the tragedy was that the insured, on August 31, 1927, was standing in the hallway of a boarding house in Jacksonville, Fla., talking to "his girl"; that a woman by the name of Clara Potter (or Pooler) was present, and made some remark about the girl to whom Waites was talking; that he protested against the Potter woman's remarks, and thereupon she cursed him, and, with a knife, stabbed him to the heart; and that he died almost immediately.
The appellant contends that the conclusive inference from this testimony is that the killing of the insured by the Potter woman was intentional on her part, and that under the provision of the policy above quoted the beneficiary was entitled to only $50. The respondent answers that under the law governing in cases of this kind the question of whether the killing was accidental or intentional was properly submitted to the jury.
Under the pleadings, the plaintiff made out a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hope v. New York Life Ins. Co.
... ... In the ... case of Linnen v. Commercial Casualty Co., 152 S.C ... 450, 150 S.E. 127, 128, Mr. Chief Justice Stabler, for ... case of Bounds v. W. O. W., 101 S.C. 325, 85 S.E ... 770, 772, Ann.Cas.1917C, 589, Mr. Justice Gage announced the ... same principle. Both the Linnen and this Bounds ... ...
-
Riggins v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United States
... ... he was putting his life and limb in hazard? Tabor v ... Commercial Casualty Ins. Co., 104 W.Va. 162, 139 S.E ... 656, 57 A.L.R. 971. Thus, even though his death ... the jury is the proper tribunal to draw inferences from the ... testimony. Linnen v. Commercial Cas. Co., 152 S.C ... 450, 150 S.E. 127; Bounds v. Sovereign Camp W. O ... W., ... ...
- Ansel v. Stribling
-
White v. North Carolina Mut. Life Ins. Co.
...and was not the result of an illegal act of anyone.' Also, see New York Life Insurance Co. v. Murdaugh, 4 Cir., 94 F.2d 104, where the Linnen case cited with approval and the authorities on the point under discussion are elaborately reviewed. The wounds found on the insured were manifestly ......