Planters' Fire Ins. Co. v. Ford

• Decision Date: 10 February 1913
• Citation: 153 S.W. 810
• Parties: PLANTERS' FIRE INS. CO. v. FORD.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

153 S.W. 810

PLANTERS' FIRE INS. CO. v. FORD.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

February 10, 1913.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Yell County; Hugh Basham, Judge.

Action by the Planters' Fire Insurance Company against J. J. Ford. From judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and rendered.

R. F. Sandlin, of Ola, for appellant. Geo. E. Floyd, of Plainview, and John T. Castle, of Little Rock, for appellee.

HART, J.

This suit was commenced by appellant against appellee before a justice of the peace to recover upon four promissory notes. Three of the notes were for $10 each and the remaining one for $8.50. They were all dated June 12, 1909, and bear interest at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum from date until paid. They were signed by appellee and payable to the order of appellant. Judgment was rendered by default in favor of appellant in the justice court. Upon appeal to the circuit court, there was a verdict and judgment for appellee, and the case is here on appeal. The notes were introduced in evidence, and they were given in payment of a premium on a fire insurance policy issued by appellant on appellee's house. Appellee admitted the execution of the notes, but says they were executed on Sunday and dated as if executed on Saturday. He says that an agent of appellant came to his house on Sunday, and solicited his application for a policy of fire insurance on his house; that he finally signed the application for insurance, and executed the notes on the same date; that the notes were dated as if they were made on the preceding Saturday; that he was drunk at the time he signed the notes, and does not remember much about it.

The testimony of appellant shows that the application for the insurance was made on Saturday, the 12th of June, 1909, and that the notes were executed on that date. The agent states that appellee was not drunk when he signed the notes. Other testimony for the appellant tends to show that at a later date its collector demanded payment of the notes, and that appellee promised to pay them. Appellee denies this, however. He admits that he kept the policy of insurance from the time it was sent him by the company until this suit was brought, a period of over two years, but says that a short time after he executed the notes he found out that they were void because executed on Sunday. He also stated that he wrote the company if they would send him the notes he would send it the policy; that he did not hear anything from the company, and did not send it the notes and kept...