Missouri State Life Insurance Co. v. Brown

• Decision Date: 26 March 1934
• Docket Number: 4-3390
• Citation: 69 S.W.2d 1075,188 Ark. 1136
• Parties: MISSOURI STATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. BROWN
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

69 S.W.2d 1075

188 Ark. 1136

MISSOURI STATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. BROWN

4-3390

Supreme Court of Arkansas

March 26, 1934

Appeal from Arkansas Circuit Court, Southern District; W. J Waggoner, Judge; affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

George Pike, F. A. Isgrig, A. D. DuLaney and Rose Hemingway, Cantrell & Loughborough, for appellant.

Meehan & Moncrief, Sam T. Poe, Tom Poe and McDonald Poe, for appellee.

OPINION

MEHAFFY, J.

The appellant, Missouri State Life Insurance Company, issued to the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company three group policies. One of them provided for indemnity in the event of accidental dismemberment; one provided for indemnity for a period of not exceeding 26 weeks for sickness, and the other provided for indemnity for total and permanent disability. The appellee, an employee of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, was issued a certificate under each of the group policies.

On May 3, 1931, the appellee lost a leg in an accident, and the company paid him $ 500 in settlement of his claim under the policy which provided for indemnity in cases of accidental dismemberment. This policy therefore is not involved in this suit.

The next policy provided for payment of $ 10 per week for the period of disability, not exceeding 26 consecutive weeks. The appellant paid on this policy $ 77.14. Suit was brought on this policy for the balance due, and also on the policy for total and permanent disability, and for 12 per cent. damages and attorney's fees.

It was contended in the court below that $ 6155 of Crawford & Moses' Digest, when applied to a case in which the insurer has reasonable grounds for contesting the claim, is unconstitutional. Appellant states, however, that its understanding is that a case is now before the Supreme Court of the United States involving the constitutionality of our statute as construed by this court. This court held that the statute was constitutional, and that the good faith of the insurance company did not excuse it from the plain provisions of the statute. Life & Casualty Ins. Co. of Tenn. v. McCray, 187 Ark. 49, 58 S.W.2d 199.

This case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, and, since the appellant prepared its brief, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided the case. It was decided March 5, 1934, 54 S.Ct. 482. That court held that the allowance of attorney's fees and 12 per cent. damages in insurance cases did not violate the provisions of the Federal Constitution, and affirmed the case. The questions as to attorney's fees and 12 per cent. damages is therefore settled by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.

The next question argued by appellants is the right of appellee to recover $ 10 a week for the balance of 26 weeks, for which appellant had not paid. It was the contention of the appellant that appellee had no ailment outside of the loss of his leg, and physicians testified that the claim of heart disease was nothing but a pretense. Other physicians, however, testified that he was totally and permanently disabled because of other ailments. This was really the only controversy as to this claim, and appellant states in its brief: "The jury's verdict has settled this controverted question of fact."

There is therefore nothing for us to consider except the action on the policy for $ 1,000 for total and permanent disability benefits. Appellant contends that, before appellee would be entitled to recover under this certificate it was necessary that he keep the same in force for a period of six months following May 3, 1931, the date on which he was injured, and that appellee had not kept this policy in force by the payment of premiums. It is...