Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Hilton-Green
Decision Date | 12 June 1916 |
Docket Number | HILTON-GREEN and W,No. 126,126 |
Parties | MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Petitioner, v. L.A. Finlay, Jr., as Executors of the Estate of C. L. Wiggins, Deceased |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Frederick L. Allen, Emmett Wilson, Philip D. Beall, and Murray Downs for petitioner.
Messrs. William A. Blount, A. C. Blount, and F. B. Carter for respondents.
Respondents sued to recover upon four policies, not different except as to numbers, for $7,662 each, and dated December 16, 1908, on the life of their testator, Wiggins, who died March 26, 1910. By various pleas the insurance company set up that application upon which policies were based contained material representations both false and fraudulent. In reply the executors denied truth of each plea, and also alleged that if appli- cation contained any misrepresentations, the actual circumstances were known to company when policies issued.
Two separate application blanks, each plainly printed upon a large, single sheet, were filled out and presented. They are substantially identical except medical examiner's report upon one, dated December 15, 1908, is signed by Geo. C. Kilpatrick, M. D., in two places, while the other, dated December 16, 1908, is twice signed by J. S. Turberville, M. D. (Under the company's rules, where insurance applied for amounted to $30,000, two medical examinations were required.)
At the top of each sheet the following appears:
Immediately thereafter are statements concerning assured's address, occupation, birth, character of policy desired, etc., and finally this, alleged and shown to be untrue: And this part of the paper concludes:
Dated at Pine Barren, Fla. Dec. 15, 1908.
Signature of person whose life is proposed for insurance,*) Cilbey L. Wiggins
I have known the above named applicant for six years and saw him sign this application. I have issued binding receipt No. ___.
Mobile, Ala.
On lower portion of the same page, under caption, 'Medical Examiner's Report,' are sundry statements, ostensibly by applicant, concerning his health history, etc.,—among them the following, alleged and shown to be untrue:
'3. (a) What illnesses, diseases, or accidents have you had since childhood? Pneumonia. Number of attacks: One. Date of each: 1899. Duration: Thirty days. Severity: Not severe. Results: Complete recovery.
This division ends thus:
Dated at Pine Barren, State of Florida the 15 day of December 1908
Witness:
Geo. C. Kilpatrick,
M. D.
I certify that my answers to the foregoing questions are correctly recorded by the Medical Examiner.
Cilbey L. Wiggins Signature of person examined.
At the top of reverse page, under 'Medical Examiner's Report (Continued),' there are many answers purporting to be replies to inquiries propounded by medical examiner concerning applicant's figure, apparent age, measurements, pulse, results of physical examination and personal investigations, etc. And then the following:
I certify that I have made this examination at Pine Barren, Fla., on this 15 day of December, 1908, and that the foregoing questions have been put, and the answers of the applicant recorded as stated.
Geo. C. Kilpatrick,
M. D.
Medical Examiner.
The four policies, after being signed in New York by the president, secretary, and registrar of the company, were delivered to assured in Florida. Among others, they contain these clauses:
'Agents are not authorized to modify this policy or to extend the time for paying a premium.'
During summer of 1907 assured suffered serious pains in his head, and, after consulting more than one physician, went to a sanitarium at Montgomery, Alabama, and was there operated on for a cystic enlargement of the lower jaw caused by an impacted wisdom tooth. He was confined to the sanitarium for ten days and remained under immediate care of a physician from July 16th to August 13th, 1907.
Early in November, 1908, he applied to Prudential Insurance Company of America through J. C. Hogue, a special agent operating under J. R. Tapia, its manager at Mobile, Alabama, for insurance amounting to $40,000. The application was accompanied, according to its requirements, by two medical reports dated November 3d and 4th, signed respectively by Dr. J. C. McLeod and Dr. Geo. C. Kilpatrick. Several weeks later the company indicated unwillingness to accept risk because of location, but the application, although marked 'withdrawn,' was retained. At this time Wiggins had $30,000 insurance with the Prudential, $20,000 with the Equitable, and $5,000 with fraternal insurance companies.
The application of petitioner now under consideration resulted from earnest and persistent solicitation by the same J. C. Hogue. The circumstances under which papers were prepared and signed are not entirely clear; but it appears without contradiction that they were not signed by assured in Torrey's presence—there was no personal acquaintance between the two men. Also that neither medical report was signed by assured in presence of Dr. Geo. C. Kilpatrick or Dr. J. S. Turberville; and that neither physician made the personal examination certified by him. The physicians filled the blanks and signed their names at Hogue's request and because of his representations. Through Torrey, petitioner's district manager at Mobile, the application was forwarded to New York, and, relying upon its statements, officers there issued policies and sent them to assured with copies of application papers which, by reference, were incorporated therein. So far as appears, assured accepted them without objection and paid the premiums.
An effort was made to show that facts concerning Wiggins's medical history, former unsuccessful application to Prudential, and circumstances surrounding transactions now in question, were known by Hogue, the medical examiners, or Torrey, each of whom, it is claimed, was petitioner's agent.
Assured was sixty-one years of age, president of a lumber company, apparently a man of considerable wealth, and experienced in insurance matters.
At conclusion of evidence, counsel for insurance company asked a directed verdict. This was refused; and the court in effect instructed the jury: That in order for company successfully to defend upon ground of false statements, these must have been material, and made by Wiggins with knowledge of their falsity, and with a fraudulent purpose,—that is, with intent to deceive. That if they believed it knew of their falsity when application was accepted, no defense could be based upon them. That it knew the actual facts if the jury 'should find that an agent whose knowledge would be the knowledge of the defendant did so know.' But if the jury found that falsity of statements was within knowledge of Hogue and Torrey and medical examiners, and further found an understanding, tacit or express, between Wiggins and said agents to procure the policies by collusive co-operation to conceal the truth, there could be no recovery. Excerpts which follow fairly indicate general import of charge:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mutual Health & Benefit Ass'n v. Cranford
......55; March v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 186 Pa. 629, 65 Am. St. Rep. 887; Penn Mut. Life ...Co., 5 F.2d. 183; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hilton-Green, 241 U.S. 613, 60 L.Ed. 1202; Priest v. Kansas City Life ......
-
Todd Shipyards Corp. v. Turbine Serv., Inc.
...agent will perform his duty and report all facts which affect the principal's interest. Mutual Life Insurance of New York v. Hilton-Green, 241 U.S. 613, 622-23, 36 S.Ct. 676, 680, 60 L.Ed. 1202 (1916). The real reason for the rule which charges a principal with his agent's knowledge is simp......
-
American Fire Ins. Co. v. King Lumber & Mfg. Co.
...... provides: 'Nor shall any state deprive any person of. life, liberty or property, without due process of law.'. . . . . ...152] . extent. How v. Union Mut. Life Ins. Co., 80 N.Y. 32;. Monitor Mut. Ins. Co. v. Young, 111 Mass. ... Insurance [74 Fla. 162] Co. v. Hilton-Green, . 241 U.S. 613, 36 S.Ct. 676, 60 L.Ed. 1202, which is cited to. us by ......
-
Evans v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Philadelphia
...insistence on good faith as the test in representation cases is perhaps the chief instance. 5 See Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Hilton-Green, 241 U.S. 613, 622, 36 S.Ct. 676, 60 L.Ed. 1202; Couch on Insurance, § 885h, p. 6 See Couch on Insurance, §§ 818, 824. 7 New York Life Ins. Co. v. Brandwene......
-
CHAPTER 5
...Life Insurance Co. v. Chamberlain, supra. Much reliance is placed by respondent on Mut. Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Hilton-Green, 241 U.S. 613 (1916), where a somewhat similar statute was involved. But there answers known by the insured and the agent to be false were written into the signe......