London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Ladd

• Decision Date: 06 June 1924
• Docket Number: 3994,3995.
• Citation: 299 F. 562
• Parties: LONDON GUARANTEE & ACCIDENT CO., Limited, v. LADD. PREFERRED ACC. INS. CO. OF NEW YORK v. SAME.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

299 F. 562

LONDON GUARANTEE & ACCIDENT CO., Limited, v. LADD.

PREFERRED ACC. INS. CO. OF NEW YORK v. SAME.

Nos. 3994, 3995.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 6, 1924

Edward Donnelly, of Detroit, Mich. (Donnelly, Hally, Donnelly &amp Munro, of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for plaintiff in error London Guarantee & Accident Co.

Frank Eaman, of Detroit, Mich. (Douglas, Eaman, Barbour & Rogers of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for plaintiff in error Preferred Acc. Ins. Co. of New York.

Justin R. Whiting, of Jackson, Mich. (Warren, Cady, Hill & Hamblen of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for defendant in error.

Before DENISON, MACK, and DONAHUE, Circuit Judges.

MACK Circuit Judge.

These were actions at law upon accident insurance policies to recover double indemnity under the terms thereof. The defendant insurance companies, the plaintiffs in error here admit their liability for single indemnity, but deny that the accident occurred under circumstances bringing it within the double indemnity provisions of the policy. The pertinent provisions of the policy in the first suit are as follows:

'Double Payments

'Part C. The amount to be paid for claims under parts A and B shall be double the sum specified in this schedule, if such injuries are sustained while riding as a passenger in a car intended for the use of passengers, and being in or upon any passenger car on a railway using steam, cable, or electricity as a motive power, or in a passenger elevator, or while traveling as a passenger on board a steam vessel licensed for the regular transportation of passengers, or are caused by the burning of a building while the assured is therein and in which he shall have been at the commencement of the fire.'

'10. Double payments under part C of the schedule shall not apply to any accident or injury, fatal or otherwise, sustained while getting on or off or being upon the step or steps of any railway or street railway car.'

The pertinent provisions of the policy in the second suit are as follows:

'Double Indemnity.

'Or, if such bodily injury is sustained by means as aforesaid (1) while the insured is a passenger and is in or upon any railway (or street railway) passenger car (including the platform steps or running board thereof), or (2) while a passenger and is on board a steam vessel licensed for the regular transportation of passengers, or (3) while a passenger and is within a passenger elevator (elevators in mines excepted), or (4) if such injury is caused by the burning of a building while the insured is therein, or (5) if caused by a stroke of lightning, or (6) if caused by the collapse of the walls of a building while the insured is therein-- then the amount to be paid shall be double the sum that would otherwise be payable as provided in parts I or II or VI hereof. But any accident or injury, fatal or otherwise, sustained while getting on or off of any railway (or street railway) passenger car shall be covered only for single indemnity.'

The injuries of the insured, which resulted in his death, came from falling down an elevator shaft in the Garfield Apartments in Cleveland. The elevator was of a style known as automatic, intended to be operated by the passengers. The apparatus was designed so that, in proper condition, the elevator could not be started unless all the doors were closed and locked, and so that no floor door could be opened from the outside, unless the carriage was at that door in a position to...