Onstad v. State Mut. Life Assur. Co.
| Decision Date | 09 April 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 34536.,34536. |
| Citation | 32 N.W.2d 185,226 Minn. 60 |
| Parties | ONSTAD v. STATE MUT. LIFE ASSUR. CO. OF WORCESTER, MASS. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Ramsey County; Robert V. Rensch, Judge.
Action by Mildred C. Onstad, formerly Mildred C. Proebstle, against the State Mutual Life Assurance Company of Worcester, Mass. to recover on a life policy with an aviation exclusion rider. The court directed a verdict against defendant for full amount of policy, and the defendant appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Snyder, Gale, Hoke, Richards & Janes, of Minneapolis, for appellant.
Bundlie, Kelley, Finley & Maun and Mandt Torrison, all of St. Paul, for respondent.
This action was brought by the beneficiary of a $2,500 life insurance policy issued by defendant, a Massachusetts insurance company, licensed to do business in this state. Recovery was sought for the full amount of the policy. The defense was grounded upon an aviation exclusion rider.
At the close of the evidence, the court directed a verdict against defendant for the full amount of the policy with interest, on the ground that the policy was a Minnesota contract and that the aviation exclusion rider was void in Minnesota. Error is assigned on that holding.
The insured was a student aviator licensed as such on August 12, 1939, when one of defendant's agents called on him at his home in St. Paul. An application for insurance was made out and the first premium paid. The application and money paid were taken to the St. Paul office of defendant's company, whence the application was sent to the home office of the Massachusetts corporation. It issued the policy and returned it to the St. Paul office for delivery on condition that the insured sign the aviation exclusion rider in duplicate, one of the duplicates to be attached to the policy and the other to be forwarded to the company. The agent was instructed to deliver the policy to the applicant only upon his signing the amendment or rider containing the aviation exclusion provisions. The rider provided:
"If the death of the insured under this policy or any policy issued in exchange herefor shall result directly or indirectly from being in or on, or operating or handling, whether as a passenger or otherwise, any kind of aircraft, or from falling therefrom or therewith, the Company's liability under this policy shall be limited to the insurance reserve thereon, computed according to the American Experience Table of Mortality with interest at three per centum per annum (3%) less any existing indebtedness, any provision of the policy to the contrary notwithstanding."
The company's agent went to the applicant's home in St. Paul, secured his signature on the amended application, and then and there delivered the policy. That was September 5, 1939. Subsequently, premiums were paid as they became due.
1. In view of our opinion in Shank v. Fidelity Mut. Life Ins. Co., 221 Minn. 124, 21 N.W.2d 235 () we do not deem it necessary to discuss the provisions of the aviation rider. The rider herein involved was far broader in scope than the provision held void in that case because it went beyond the statutory provision for policies to be issued in hazardous occupations. Consequently, if the policy was a Minnesota contract, the trial court must be affirmed.
2. M.S.A. § 60.27 provides:
"Every company, domestic or foreign, shall file with the commissioner its acceptance of the provisions of the insurance laws of the state of Minnesota, and its charter and any amendments thereto, and each such company shall be governed thereby and by those laws relative to corporations in general, so far as applicable and not otherwise specifically provided."
M.S.A. §...
To continue reading
Request your trial