Ravenscroft v. Kansas City Life Insurance Co.

• Decision Date: 01 April 1929
• Docket Number: 5054
• Parties: LULU RAVENSCROFT, Appellant, v. KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

276 P. 303

47 Idaho 425

LULU RAVENSCROFT, Appellant, v. KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent

No. 5054

Supreme Court of Idaho

April 1, 1929

INSURANCE-CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT-DELIVERY OF POLICY.

Where life insurance policy was issued pursuant to application providing that contract was to be void and of no binding force unless application was received and accepted and policy delivered during insured's lifetime and while in good health, it did not take effect where insured was dead at time policy was manually delivered to beneficiary without proof of constructive delivery during lifetime of insured.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District for Twin Falls County. Hon. William A. Babcock, Judge.

Action on life insurance policy. Judgment for defendant. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Costs to respondent.

Bothwell & Chapman, for Appellant.

A policy of insurance is constructively delivered when it is mailed to an agent unconditionally for delivery to insured. (Jackson v. New York Life Ins. Co., 299 F. 679, 7 F.2d 31; Kilborn v. Prudential Ins. Co., 99 Minn 176, 108 N.W. 861; Unterharnscheidt v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co., 160 Iowa 223, 138 N.W. 459, 45 L. R. A N. S., 743; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Babcock, 104 Ga. 67, 69 Am. St. 134, 30 S.E. 273; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Pike, 51 Colo. 238, 117 P. 899; Coci v. New York Life Ins. Co., 155 La. 1060, 99 So. 871; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 94 Ky. 253, 22 S.W. 87; 32 C. J. 1125.)

Conditions upon which delivery of a policy of insurance are dependent may be waived by agents of the insurance company, it being a corporation and able to act only through its agents and officers empowered to act for it, and an agent empowered to deliver policies is the representative of the corporation and acts done within the scope of such power are binding upon the corporation even though the contract contains a general clause declaring the agent to have no power to waive the contract. (McLaurin v. New York Mut. Life Ins. Co., 115 S.C. 59, 104 S.E. 327; Fair v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 5 Ga.App. 708, 63 S.E. 813; 37 C. J. 405; Northwestern Life Assn. v. Findley, 29 Tex. Civ. App. 494, 68 S.W. 695; 5 Elliott on Contracts, sec. 4165.)

Walters, Parry & Thoman, for Respondent.

The lower court held enforceable the provision in the application for insurance making the contract void if the policy was not delivered during the lifetime of the insured and or while in good health, and likewise held as enforceable the provision in the policy of insurance, providing: "unless the applicant is in good health at the time of its delivery." A case entirely sustaining the decision of the lower court and holding valid and enforceable the above provisions is found in the case of Rathbun v. New York Life Ins. Co., 30 Idaho 34, 165 P. 997.

Upon rehearing this court said (p. 40):

"We concur in the conclusion reached by the court in its original opinion, that the policy in question never took effect because it was not delivered to and received by the applicant while he was in good health. The policy provides that 'the policy and the application therefor constitutes the entire contract between the parties' and under the terms of the application it was made a condition precedent to the policy's taking effect, that the insured should be in good health when the policy was delivered and received. (14 R. C. L. 900, sec. 78.)"

VARIAN, J. Budge, C. J., and Givens and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

OPINION

VARIAN, J.

On March 12, 1918, appellant's son, Fred Lation Ravenscroft, signed an application for a $ 2,000 life insurance policy, and delivered it to one B. M. Atkinson, a soliciting agent for respondent, and passed the medical examination required by respondent's rules. The application was mailed to respondent's head office at Kansas City, where it was received on March 23, 1918. A policy was issued on said application, dated March 26, 1918, delivered to the State Insurance Department of the state of Missouri for registration, where it was registered on March 28, 1918, and was thereafter mailed to respondent's general agent at Salt Lake City, Utah.

The applicant was fatally injured in an automobile accident on the night of March 30, 1918, and died in the early hours of the following day. On Sunday, March 31st, the local agent of respondent at Twin Falls, one C. T. Bunce, telephoned respondent's agent, W. G. Hunter, at Salt Lake City, to know if the policy had been received by him, and advised said agent of the death of the applicant. The policy arrived at Twin Falls on Tuesday, April 2, 1918, in the noon mail, and was thereupon delivered by Bunce to appellant, the beneficiary named in the policy. The fact of payment of the first premium is not contested.

The application contains the following provisions:

"That it is expressly agreed to and understood upon my part that this contract is to be null and void and of no binding force whatever, unless my application is received and accepted at the home office of the Company and approved by the Medical Director and the policy of Insurance is delivered to me or my beneficiary during my lifetime and while in good health."

The policy contains the provisions that "said policy and application constitute the entire contract between the parties, " and that "this policy shall not take effect unless the first premium hereon has been paid and this policy delivered to the applicant within thirty days from the date hereof, or unless the applicant is in good health at the time of its delivery."

The agency contract with Hunter at Salt Lake, and with Bunce, the agent at Twin Falls, who received the policy in question expressly states that they have no authority to make, alter, or discharge any contract of insurance issued by the company, or to make any...