Provident Life & Accident Co. v. Grabiel
| Decision Date | 13 February 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 4-2826.,4-2826. |
| Citation | 57 S.W.2d 824 |
| Parties | PROVIDENT LIFE & ACCIDENT CO. OF CHATTANOOGA, TENN., v. GRABIEL. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Pulaski County, Third Division; Marvin Harris, Judge.
Suit by Paul Grabiel against the Provident Life & Accident Company of Chattanooga, Tenn. From the judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
This appeal comes from a judgment upon an insurance policy for monthly indemnity for disability suffered by the insured for the amount claimed thereunder.
It was conceded at the trial that the policy of insurance, under which the claim was made, was in force at the time of the alleged disability of the insured, and admitted that the disability existed within the meaning of the policy for the time for which indemnity was claimed herein.
The suit was instituted by appellee to recover the sum of $174 per month for the period of time between February 4, 1930, to June 8, 1931, on account of disability caused by illness for that period under the terms of the policy of life insurance carried by the appellee in the appellant company containing a provision for permanent and total disability benefits as follows:
Appellant offered to pay appellee $174 only, contending that it had no notice of the disability suffered by the insured before receiving a letter written by him on July 20, 1931, and under the terms of the policy that it was not liable to him for anything prior to receipt of written proofs of the disability, from which appellee had recovered before the letter of July 20, 1931 was written.
Appellee introduced proof tending to show that he mailed a letter to the insurance company under date of July 12, 1930, informing them of his disability, and contended that the construction placed upon the terms of the policy by appellant to the effect that it was not liable under the policy for any payments before receiving proper proof of disability was wrong.
The court instructed the jury, which returned a verdict for the full amount claimed, and, from the judgment thereon, the appeal is prosecuted.
Buzbee, Pugh & Harrison, of Little Rock, for appellant.
Louis M. Cohn, of Little Rock, for appellee.
KIRBY, Justice (after stating the facts).
Appellant first contends that the testimony is not sufficient to support the verdict and insufficient to prove that any notice was given of the disability under the policy that would warrant a recovery in the case. It is insisted that the presumption that the letter of July 12, 1930, properly mailed to the company, was delivered, had been overcome by the rebuttal testimony, and that in any event it was not sufficient notice of loss as required by the terms of the policy.
The testimony showed that the letter was dictated by the insured, written by the stenographer at the hospital on the same day, and thereafter signed by the insured, was addressed accurately to the appellant company at Chattanooga, Tenn., with the insured's return address on the corner of the envelope, the ward of the hospital in which he was confined being shown thereon; and the stenographer testified that the envelope was stamped properly, that she carried it to the post office station and mailed it herself, although she did not remember...
To continue reading
Request your trial