McCarthy v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 19 October 1894
• Citation: 162 Mass. 254,38 N.E. 435
• Parties: McCARTHY v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

162 Mass. 254

38 N.E. 435

McCARTHY v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Hampden.

October 19, 1894

COUNSEL

J.B. Carroll and W.H. McClintock, for plaintiff.

E.H Lathrop, for defendant.

OPINION

LATHROP J.

The defendant in this case, after an application in writing made by Ellen McCarthy, issued to her a policy of insurance upon her life, in which it agreed to pay to the person or persons designated in the fifth condition of the policy, upon receipt of proofs satisfactory to said company of the death of the insured, a certain amount of money. The fifth condition reads as follows: "The production by the company of this policy, and of a receipt for the sum assured, signed by any person furnishing proof satisfactory to the company that he or she is an executor or administrator, husband or wife, or relative by blood, or lawful beneficiary, of the insured shall be conclusive evidence that such sum has been paid to and received by the person or persons lawfully entitled to the same, and that all claims and demands upon said company under this policy have been fully satisfied." In the application made by Ellen McCarthy, under the heading "Name," etc., "of the person to whom benefit is to be paid," is written, "Florence McCarthy, nephew." This case is an action on the policy, brought by the administrator of the estate of Ellen McCarthy. At the trial the defendant asked the court to rule that the plaintiff could not maintain the action, and that the beneficiary named in the contract was the only person entitled to sue. The court declined so to rule, and the case comes before us on the defendant's exceptions.

If the policy in this case had been under seal, it is clear that the plaintiff would be the only person entitled to maintain the action. Campbell v. Insurance Co., 98 Mass. 381 400; Bailey v. Insurance Co., 114 Mass. 177; Flynn v. Insurance Co., 115 Mass. 449; Rindge v. Society, 146 Mass. 286, 289, 15 N.E. 628. The policy here does not purport to be sealed, the language of the final clause being: "In witness whereof, the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has, by its president, signed and delivered this policy." There is, however, a fac simile of the seal of the corporation printed upon it. If this was done at the time the blank form of policy was printed, it is not a good seal. Dean v. Legion of Honor, 156 Mass. 435, 436, 31 N.E. 1. Treating the policy,...