National Life Ins. Co. of America v. Hedgecoth
Decision Date | 20 November 1917 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 216 |
Parties | NATIONAL LIFE INS. CO. OF AMERICA v. HEDGECOTH. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Dec. 18, 1917
Appeal from City Court of Bessemer; J.C.B. Gwin, Judge.
Action by Nathan O. Hedgecoth against the National Life Insurance Company of America. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Certiorari denied 77 So. 1000.
Plaintiff sued defendant for the amount covered by the policy due him by reason of confinement on account of sickness during the months of December, 1914, and January and February, 1915. Plea A is that in the application for the policy the following provision occurs:
"I hereby apply to the National Life Insurance Company *** for a policy to be based upon the following representation of facts."
And defendant avers that one of the representations made in said application was that insured had never had or been affected with any kind of heart disease or kidney trouble or kidney disease, and defendant avers that this was a material representation, and was fraudulently made by defendant, in order to procure the policy here sued on, and such misrepresentation was made with actual intent to deceive, and was false, and the matter misrepresented increased the risk of loss, wherefore defendant is not indebted to plaintiff in any sum, having paid into court all premiums, and the policy for which was paid by plaintiff. Pleas 2, 3, 7, 8, and B set these same matters up by way of misrepresentations and warranties, and that same formed a part of the policy contract. The matters set up in plea 4 was that insured was not disabled from performing all his duties for seven consecutive days, as is required by the provisions of the policy.
In his closing argument to the jury counsel stated to the jury that defendant had scoured the records of every doctor's office in the county to get something on plaintiff, and also plaintiff was as sweet as a ten-cent bottle of Hoyt's Cologne as long as he was paying in, but as soon as he got sick he was as offensive as a polecat to the company. The following is the portion of the court's oral charge excepted to:
If the jury is reasonably satisfied from the evidence of every material averment of plea A, if you believe every material fact set up in the plea is true, and it has been established from the evidence, then this plaintiff could not recover anything back except the actual money he paid for the premium.
Mathews & Mathews, of Bessemer, for appellant.
Goodwyn & Ross, of Bessemer, for appellee.
The appellant does not seem to seriously treat the assignment of error predicated on the action of the court in overruling the demurrers to the complaint. All that is said with reference thereto is "every material fact which constitutes the ground of plaintiff's action must be alleged in his declaration when the complaint does not follow the code form." This statement does not undertake to point out wherein the complaint fails to meet these requirements, nor do we find any such defect.
The defendant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Whitman
...L.I. Co. v. Goodman, 196 Ala. 304, 71 So. 409; Amer. Nat. Ins. Co. v. Moore, 14 Ala.App. 413, 415, 70 So. 190; Nat. L.I. Co. v. Hedgecoth (App.) 77 So. 422. defense of the misrepresentation made by assured in the application for insurance, on which instant policy issued, was sought to be pr......
-
Berkowitz v. Farrell
... ... Stowe, 15 Ala. App. 293, 73 So. 202; National Life ... Insurance Co. v. Hedgecoth, 16 Ala. App. 272, 77 ... ...
-
Lindsey v. Barton
...the plaintiff was permanently disabled. Life & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Bell, 235 Ala. 548, 180 So. 573; National Life Ins. Co. of America v. Hedgecoth, 16 Ala. App. 272, 77 So. 422; State Realty Co. v. Ligon, 218 Ala. 541, 119 So. The competency vel non of that testimony aside, however, substa......
- Graham v. Wall