Providence Life Ins. & Inv. Co. of Chicago v. Martin

Decision Date09 March 1870
Citation32 Md. 310
PartiesTHE PROVIDENCE LIFE INSURANCE AND INVESTMENT CO. OF CHICAGO v. ANNA MARTIN.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Allegany County.

The cause was argued before BARTOL, C.J., STEWART, BRENT, MILLER and ALVEY, J.

George A. Thruston, for the appellant.

William Walsh, for the appellee.

MILLER J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

By the policy upon which this action was brought, the husband of the appellee was insured against fatal accidents, as well as those resulting only in personal injury. The assured was a locomotive engineer, in the employ of a railroad company whose principal business is the transportation of coal from the mines in Allegany county; and, on the 21st of July, 1866 whilst backing his engine upon a down grade, with a car in front as a precaution to check the speed, he directed the fireman to run it, and went upon and over the tender to get into this car to draw the brakes, and in doing so slipped and fell between the car and the tender, and was instantly killed by the tender passing over his body. The speed at the time was about eight miles per hour, on a descending grade. The chief grounds of defence taken by the insurance company, which we shall consider in their order, are:

1st. That, under all the circumstances of the case, this was not an accident within the terms and conditions of the policy for which the insurers are responsible.

2d. That notice of the death, with full particulars of the accident, was not given within the time required by the second condition of the policy.

1st. The policy insured the "deceased against loss of life in the sum of $2,000, to be paid to Anna Martin or her legal representatives within ninety days after sufficient proof that the assured, at any time after the date hereof, and before the expiration of this policy, shall have sustained personal injury caused by any accident within the meaning of this policy and the conditions hereunto annexed, and such injuries shall occasion death within ninety days from the happening thereof, sufficient proof being furnished this company." It is then provided that no claim shall be made under this policy in respect of any injury unless the same shall be caused by some outward and visible means, of which proof satisfactory to the company can be furnished, "and this insurance shall not extend to any injury caused by or arising from natural disease, or by any surgical operation rendered necessary by disease, or to any death or injury caused by duelling or fighting, or other breach of the law on the part of the assured, or by suicide, whether felonious or otherwise, or by war, riots or invasion, or happening while the assured is in a state of intoxication, or riding races, or by his wilfully exposing himself to any unnecessary danger or peril." It is also further provided that """this policy is granted on the express condition that the declarations of the assured in his application for this insurance (which is hereby referred to and made part of this contract, and a warranty on the part of the assured) are true in all respects." In his application the assured said: "My age is thirty-two years; my profession or occupation is locomotive engineer; my class of insurance is general accident; my class of risk is special," &c. It was proved that the premium for insuring an engineer, fireman or brakeman was the same in each case, and was the highest rate except for persons working in a powder mill.

It is wholly unnecessary to examine, in this case, the law upon the subject of warranty or of conditions precedent, for it is not pretended the statements in the application for insurance were not, in every respect, literally true. The assured was at the time of his application, a locomotive engineer by profession or occupation, and the condition or warranty in this particular was fully gratified. The purpose of this stipulation was to enable the company to fix the rate of premium and guard it against misrepresentation and fraud by preventing those whose ordinary occupation rendered them more exposed to accident, from obtaining insurance at the same rate as those whose professions and pursuits in life are usually attended with less peril and less exposure to danger. But there is no condition or warranty, in any part of the policy, that the assured will not temporarily or permanently engage in any other occupation, nor does the contract stipulate that the accident insured against must happen whilst the assured was acting or engaged in his employment as a locomotive engineer. On the contrary, the company contracted, in plain, unequivocal terms, to insure the deceased against any accident save those embraced in the enumerated exceptions, and every injury caused by accident, save those specially excepted, is within the meaning of the policy and its conditions. It is not, therefore, a substantive defence to this action, even if the proof established the fact that the deceased, at the time of the injury, was endeavoring to perform the duty of a brakeman, or was acting out of the line of his own duty as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Eckelberry v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia
    • December 1, 2005
    ...chief goals of accident insurance, however, is to protect insureds from the effects of their own acts. Providence Life Ins. & Inv. Co. v. Martin, 32 Md. 310, 1870 WL 3948, at *2 (1870); Scales, supra, at 243. Even if an accident results because of the insured's own fault, the insured still ......
  • Sleeter v. Progressive Assurance Company
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • March 2, 1934
    ... ... life of the deceased and payable to his estate. The ... Frommelt v. Travelers Ins. Co. 150 Minn. 66, 184 ... N.W. 565; Cady v ... 208 Ill.App ... 506; Provident L. Ins. & Inv. Co. v. Baum, 29 Ind ... 236; Providence L ... & Inv. Co. v. Martin, 32 Md ... 310, 315; Emerson v. Old Line L ... ...
  • Lickleider v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Ass'n
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • February 9, 1918
    ... ... 366] ... a usual or necessary act (Providence Life Ins. & Inv ... Co. v. Martin, 32 Md. 310) ... ...
  • Wertheimer-Swarts Shoe Co. v. United States Casualty Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • February 18, 1903
    ...is no defense. 2 May on Insurance (3 Ed.), secs. 408, 409, 411; Ins. Co. v. Glasgow, 8 Mo. 713; Mueller v. Ins. Co., 45 Mo. 84; Ins. Co. v. Martin, 32 Md. 310; Schneider Ins. Co., 24 Wis. 28; Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 39 Kan. 449; Chaplain v. Railway Pass. Ass'n, 6 Lansing (N. Y.) 72; Keerne v.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT