National Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Saffold

Decision Date10 November 1932
Docket Number3 Div. 20.
Citation144 So. 816,225 Ala. 664
CourtAlabama Supreme Court
PartiesNATIONAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INS. CO. v. SAFFOLD.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 22, 1932.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Leon McCord, Judge.

Action on a policy of life insurance by Nellie Saffold against the National Life & Accident Insurance Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals.

Affirmed.

John S Tilley, of Montgomery, for appellant.

L. A Sanderson, of Montgomery, for appellee.

FOSTER J.

Our attention, on this appeal, is directed first to the motion for a new trial and the ruling of the court on it.

We have carefully considered the evidence. In many respects it is in sharp conflict, presenting a question for the jury. It is not primarily a question with us of the credibility of the witnesses, unless it is apparent that due consideration was not given to their testimony in the trial court. There was abundant evidence that Mary Sloan, or Hartley, applied for the insurance while in good health, and kept up payment of the premiums until her death. True, there was evidence to the contrary, but a finding for plaintiff was not against the great weight of it. It is not at all a plain case of where some other person substituted for her. Such claim was on a theory sought to be drawn from circumstances, and depended upon belief of the evidence of defendant to support those circumstances. Doubtless the argument made here was that presented to the jury trying the issues who had the witnesses before them. We cannot sustain the contention of appellant that there was reversible error in overruling the motion.

Neither can we sustain the second point of the argument made by appellant, that related to refused charge 3. The charge lacks essential qualities of the principle which applies, and material averments of the pleas. The unsoundness of the health of the insured, when the policy was issued, must have either increased the risk of loss, or her representation of sound health must have been made with the actual intent to deceive. Independent Life Ins. Co. v. Seale, 219 Ala. 197, 121 So. 714; National Life & Accident Ins. Co v. Albert, 219 Ala. 189, 121 So. 708 (where the authorities are cited).

The evidence was sufficient to justify a finding that, while the true name of the insured was Mary Hartley, she was known and called Mary Sloan, by which she was designated in the policy; that she signed the name of Mary Sloan to the application and gave that as her name to the agent soliciting the insurance; that, while her husband was named Henry Hartley, he often used the name of Henry Sloan, and was so known and called; that his stepfather was named Sloan, and by that circumstance he was so called. If such was found to be the situation, the result was not that a different person was designated as the insured, but that the one person was designated by the name by which she was often called. There is no necessity under such circumstances to reform the policy in equity so as to change her name from that stated in it. The purpose of a name is to designate a person. This is accomplished when it is that by which she is known or called, as when she herself declares it to be her name. Ingram v. Watson, 211 Ala. 410, 100 So. 557; Milbra v. S.-S. S. & I. Co., 182 Ala. 623, 630, 62 So. 176, 179, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 274; 45 Corpus Juris 376; Alabama Clay Products Co. v. Mathews, 220 Ala. 549, 126 So. 869; Martin v. Hemphill (Tex. Com. App.) 237 S.W. 550, 20 A. L. R. 984.

When a contract is thus made in an assumed name, the person so named may be sued in his true name on such contract. 45 Corpus Juris, 377; Carlisle v. People's Bank, 122 Ala 446, 26 So. 115; May v. Clanton, 208...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • July 8, 2011
    ...20 So.2d 536 [ (1944) ]; William E. Harden, Inc. v. Harden, 29 Ala.App. 411, 197 So. 94 [ (1940) ]; National Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Saffold, 225 Ala. 664, 144 So. 816 [ (1932) ]; U.S. Cast Iron Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Granger, 172 Ala. 546, 55 So. 244 [ (1911) ].” 1. Norfolk Southern Rai......
  • Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 11, 2011
    ...564, 20 So. 2d 536 [(1944)]; William E. Harden, Inc. v. Harden, 29 Ala. App. 411, 197 So. 94[(1940)]; National Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Saffold, 225 Ala. 664, 144 So. 816 [(1932)]; U.S. Cast Iron Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Granger, 172 Ala. 546, 55 So. 244 [(1911)]." Birmingham Elec. Co. v. L......
  • Birmingham Elec. Co. v. Linn
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • March 16, 1948
    ... ... 242, ... 107 So. 33; National Life & Accident Ins. Co. Curtin, ... Ala.App., 29 So.2d ... 94; National Life & ... Accident Ins. Co. v. Saffold, 225 Ala. 664, 144 So. 816; U ... S. Cast Iron Pipe & ... ...
  • Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Jackson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • November 17, 1932
    ... ... the vision of the engineer to the scene of the accident ... became unobstructed by reason of the curve in the cut ... ...
  • 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