New York Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 5617.
| Citation | 39 F.2d 376 |
| Decision Date | 21 April 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 5617.,5617. |
| Parties | NEW YORK LIFE INS. CO. v. BROWN. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
W. Colquitt Carter and Grover Middlebrooks, both of Atlanta, Ga. (Louis H. Cooke, of New York City, and Bryan & Middlebrooks, of Atlanta, Ga., on the brief), for appellant.
John T. Dennis and R. B. Blackburn, both of Atlanta, Ga. (Hewlett & Dennis, of Atlanta, Ga., on the brief), for appellee.
Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.
Appellee, as beneficiary, brought suit on two policies of insurance on the life of Max Brown, which provided for double indemnity if the death of the insured resulted directly from external, violent, and accidental means. Appellant had admitted liability for the face of the policies and had paid that amount, but defended against double indemnity on the ground that the insured had committed suicide. Appellee recovered a verdict on which judgment was entered. A new trial was denied, and this appeal followed. Error is assigned to the refusal of a directed verdict at the close of the evidence.
The insured, a tailor, was found asphyxiated by illuminating gas, sitting at a table in his place of business, in Jacksonville, Fla., about 7 o'clock in the morning. Close by was a pressing iron which, when in use, was heated by gas through a flexible tube connected to a gas fixture on the wall. While there is no doubt that the room was filled with gas at the time the body was discovered, the evidence was conflicting as to other conditions existing at the time. There was testimony tending to show that the tube was connected to the iron but disconnected from the fixture, but, also, that the fixture was turned off, and the source of the gas leak could not be discovered; that the cock in the fixture was loose, and gas had been known to escape before. On the other hand, there was testimony tending to show that the tube was disconnected from the iron and gas was pouring out of it and that the cock in the fixture was open. As throwing light upon the mental attitude of deceased, there was testimony tending to show that shortly before his death he had been divorced from his wife, appellant, and that she was constantly harassing him for money; that he was in bad financial shape, unable to pay his rent, and could not account for certain moneys that had been paid to him for the purchase of cloth to be used in the making of uniforms for the police band. On the other hand, there was testimony tending to show that he was cheerful and in good spirits immediately before his death; that his wife and he had become reconciled and, while they did not live together, they were friendly and saw each other frequently, the last time a day or two before his death.
On the facts shown by the record, the case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lavender v. Volunteer State Life, Ins. Co
......Co. v. Taylor, 94 A. S. R. 383;. Patterson v. Ins. Co., 42 L. R. A. 253; Fore v. New York Life Ins. Co., [171 Miss. 172] 67 A. L. R. 1358; United Order v. Overton, 83 So. 59; Mutual. Life ...896; Mass. Protective. Assn. v. Cranford, 137 Miss. 901; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 39 F.2d 376; Travelers Ins. Co. of. Hartford v. McConkey, 127 U.S. 661, 666, 8 S.Ct. 1360, 32. ......
-
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gill
...F. 946; U. S. Casualty Co. of N.Y. v. Malone, 126 Miss, 73, 87 So. 896; Mass. Protective Assn. v. Cranford, 137 Miss. 901; N. Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 39 F.2d 376; Travelers Ins. Co. v. McConkey, 127 U.S. 661, 8 S.Ct. 32 L.Ed. 308. There is a distinction between an accidental death and de......
-
Lewis v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co.
...v. Standard Accident Ins. Co., 180 Cal. 252, 180 P. 607. The same instruction in substance was given in the case of New York Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 5 Cir., 39 F.2d 376, and the federal court held the instruction properly given. Counsel urges that this instruction is in conflict with instru......
-
Lewis v. New York Life Ins. Co.
......161; Cooper v. Romney, 49 Mont. 119, 141. P. 289, Ann.Cas.1916A, 596; Anderson v. Wirkman, 67. Mont. 176, 215 P. 224; State ex rel. Brown v. District. Court, 72 Mont. 213, 232 P. 201; California Packing. Corp. v. McClintock, 75 Mont. 72, 241 P. 1077; Maki. v. Murray Hospital, 91 ......