New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson
Decision Date | 10 August 1938 |
Docket Number | No. 6225.,6225. |
Citation | 98 F.2d 950 |
Parties | NEW YORK LIFE INS. CO. v. JACKSON et al. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Rudolph J. Kramer, Bruce A. Campbell, R. E. Costello, Roland H. Wiechert, and Norman J. Gundlach, all of East St. Louis, Ill. (James J. Graham, of Springfield, Ill., and Louis H. Cooke, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
M. W. Feuerbacher, Arthur J. Freund, and Fred A. Eppenberger, all of St. Louis, Mo., for appellees.
Before EVANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges, and LINDLEY, District Judge.
Appellant filed suit against the insured and the beneficiary of a policy, to cancel the reinstatement of the policy on the ground that such reinstatement was obtained by fraud. The defendants denied the responsibility of the insured for any misrepresentation because of his mental incapacity at the time it was alleged to have been made. They also filed a cross-bill seeking payment of monthly disability benefits provided by the policy. The District Court rendered a decree in favor of the defendants on the cross-bill, declaring void the reinstatement of the policy, but holding it in full force from the date of issue. We affirmed the decree (7 Cir., 94 F.2d 288), and the Supreme Court granted certiorari, 304 U.S. 261, 58 S.Ct. 871, 82 L.Ed. ___ and remanded the cause to this court for further consideration, stating that we had considered the question presented as one of general law instead of basing our decision on principles of the state law applicable. The insured resided in Missouri when the policy was issued and delivered to him.
In our opinion of January 10, 1938, we stated that the problem was "whether, under the provisions of the policy here involved, an insurer is liable for disability benefits to its insured who became totally and permanently disabled during the period of grace following the date on which a semi-annual premium payment fell due, which premium was not paid until after the expiration of the period of grace." We repeat the pertinent provisions of the policy:
We rested our original decision on the ground that there was an inconsistency between the grace provision of the policy and other clauses, which inconsistency was to be construed in favor of the insured, and that since the grace clause provided that the policy was to be continued in force during the period of grace, the occurrence of either event insured against, namely death or total disability, served to mature the rights created by the policy, other provisions to the contrary notwithstanding.
Upon remand of the cause to this court, we afforded counsel an opportunity to file briefs on the applicable Missouri law. About two-thirds of the cases cited by appellant in response were decided by federal courts or the courts of states other than Missouri. Since the case was remanded for the purpose of decision according to the applicable principles of Missouri law, we do not find extensive citation of other authority helpful. We take it that the only question presented at this time is whether or not the decision previously reached by us upon consideration of the issues then presented to us as a matter of general law and studied by us accordingly, is out of harmony with principles of law of the state of Missouri. If there is no conflict, then our original...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Thompson
...In re Pointer Brewing Co., Verbst, Trustee, v. Michael Yundt Company, 8 Cir., 105 F.2d 478, decided July 19, 1939; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson, 7 Cir., 98 F.2d 950, 952. Under Illinois law a railroad company may acquire its right of way by condemnation (Section 13, Article 2 of the Co......
-
Terry v. New York Life Ins. Co.
...of the policy. Driscoll v. Edison Light & Power Co., 59 S.Ct. 715, 83 L.Ed. ___, decided April 17, 1939; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson, 7 Cir., 98 F.2d 950, 952. The construction to be placed upon this same incontestability clause has come before a number of courts for interpretation. T......
-
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. United States
...resort to rules of construction where the intent of the parties is expressed in clear and unambiguous language. New York Life Insurance Co. v. Jackson, 7 Cir., 98 F.2d 950; Columbia Gas Construction Co. v. Holbrook, 81 F.2d 417; MacDonald v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 6 Cir., 76 F. 5......
-
Malloy v. New York Life Ins. Co.
...292 U.S. 487, 496, 54 S. Ct. 813, 78 L.Ed. 1380; Burgess v. Seligman, 107 U.S. 20, 2 S.Ct. 10, 27 L.Ed. 359; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Jackson et al., 7 Cir., 98 F.2d 950. It is the law of Maine, as it is generally that if the language of an insurance policy is ambiguous, or susceptible of ......