MacKinnon v. Fid. & Cas. Co.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
Writing for the CourtGARRISON, J.
Citation72 N.J.L. 29,60 A. 180
Decision Date17 March 1905
PartiesMacKINNON v. FIDELITY & CASUALTY CO.
60 A. 180
72 N.J.L. 29

MacKINNON
v.
FIDELITY & CASUALTY CO.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

March 17, 1905.


(Syllabus by the Court.)

Action by Minnie D. MacKinnon against the Fidelity & Casualty Company. Demurrer to plea sustained.

Argued November term, 1904, before GUMMERE, C. J., and GARRISON and GARRETSON, JJ.

Louis G. Morten, for plaintiff. W. D. Edwards, for defendant.

GARRISON, J. This is a demurrer to a plea. The declaration averred that the defendant had insured the husband of the plaintiff against "disability or death resulting directly from bodily injuries sustained through accidental means" by a certain contract or policy of insurance made with him, a copy of which was annexed to the declaration, and expressly referred to therein and made a part thereof. The policy so annexed included a schedule of warranties consisting of a series of questions and answers, one of which is as follows:

"K. No application ever made by me for insurance has been declined, and no accident or health policy issued to me has been canceled or renewal refused, except as herein stated. No."

The plea to which a demurrer has been filed recites the precise language of this section, and identifies it as section K., and then goes on to aver that such statement was false and untrue, because the insured had

made an application for a policy of life insurance which was declined.

The primary question is whether the word "Insurance" in the first clause of this warranty means life insurance, the plaintiff contending that it refers only to insurance of the sort for which the insured was applying, viz., accident or health insurance. The word "insurauce" in this clause evidently did not mean any insurance, for in that case it would cover not only life and accident insurauce, but also fire insurance and insurance against tornadoes, burglars, liability to employés, as well as credit, live stock, plate glass, and other similar insurances, which admittedly were not intended. The word "insurance" not being used in its universal sense, the clause requires construction to ascertain its fair meaning and intent. After an original diversity of opinion as to the proper construction of this clause, we have concluded that the insurance there spoken of is life insurance. This conclusion, which was reached by a comparative examination of the other clauses and sections of the same schedule, leaves untouched the fact that the interrogation covers two transactions so coupled...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Evans v. Cheyenne Cement, Stone & Brick Company, 673
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • March 24, 1913
    ...Ry. Co. v. Henderson (Colo.), 13 P. 910; Barton v. Kane, 17 Wis. 38; Ingalls v. Oberg (Minn.), 72 N.W. 841; Carey v. Packet Co. (N. J.), 60 A. 180; Jones v. Ry. Co., 46 N.Y.S. 321; Ayres v. Ins. Co. (Ia.), 85 Am. Dec. 559; Weinhard v. Bank (Or.), 68 P. 806.) The court found that the defenda......
  • Maloney v. Maryland Casualty Company, 326
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • May 18, 1914
    ...printed form furnished by the company, its language will be construed most strongly against the company. 1 Cyc. 245; 65 Ark. 59; 38 F. 19; 60 A. 180; 115 N.W. 869. Moreover, the company's agent, as he testified, drew up the application for Maloney himself, and the company is estopped from s......
  • Urback v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 5.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • May 13, 1943
    ...as the ambiguity is resolved,’ the question is construed most strongly against the insurer. Mackinnon v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 72 N.J.L. 29, 60 A. 180. The insured was warranted in treating the inquiries in strict literalism. Considering the frame of the questions, it cannot be said ......
  • Benham v. American Central Life Insurance Company, 5
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • November 24, 1919
    ...training for a commission and consequently a permit was not necessary. Forfeitures are not favored. 133 Ark. 174; 1 Cyc. 245; 65 Ark. 59; 60 A. 180; 155 N.W. 860. The contract will be construed most strongly against the insurer. 94 Ark. 417; 80 Id. 49; 89 Id. 471. 2. The clause, "death......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Evans v. Cheyenne Cement, Stone & Brick Company, 673
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • March 24, 1913
    ...Ry. Co. v. Henderson (Colo.), 13 P. 910; Barton v. Kane, 17 Wis. 38; Ingalls v. Oberg (Minn.), 72 N.W. 841; Carey v. Packet Co. (N. J.), 60 A. 180; Jones v. Ry. Co., 46 N.Y.S. 321; Ayres v. Ins. Co. (Ia.), 85 Am. Dec. 559; Weinhard v. Bank (Or.), 68 P. 806.) The court found that the defenda......
  • Maloney v. Maryland Casualty Company, 326
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • May 18, 1914
    ...printed form furnished by the company, its language will be construed most strongly against the company. 1 Cyc. 245; 65 Ark. 59; 38 F. 19; 60 A. 180; 115 N.W. 869. Moreover, the company's agent, as he testified, drew up the application for Maloney himself, and the company is estopped from s......
  • Urback v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 5.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • May 13, 1943
    ...as the ambiguity is resolved,’ the question is construed most strongly against the insurer. Mackinnon v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 72 N.J.L. 29, 60 A. 180. The insured was warranted in treating the inquiries in strict literalism. Considering the frame of the questions, it cannot be said ......
  • Benham v. American Central Life Insurance Company, 5
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • November 24, 1919
    ...training for a commission and consequently a permit was not necessary. Forfeitures are not favored. 133 Ark. 174; 1 Cyc. 245; 65 Ark. 59; 60 A. 180; 155 N.W. 860. The contract will be construed most strongly against the insurer. 94 Ark. 417; 80 Id. 49; 89 Id. 471. 2. The clause, "death......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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