Reserve Loan Life Ins. Co. v. Hockett
| Decision Date | 14 March 1905 |
| Docket Number | No. 4,692.,4,692. |
| Citation | 35 Ind.App. 89,73 N.E. 842 |
| Parties | RESERVE LOAN LIFE INS. CO. v. HOCKETT. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County; John F. McClure, Judge.
Action on a policy of life insurance by Maria Hockett against the Reserve Loan Life Insurance Company. From the judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
Guilford A. Deitch and W. A. Ketcham, for appellant. Ellison & Ellis and Kittinger & Diven, for appellee.
Appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal was postponed until final hearing. The record shows by an order book entry that the bill of exceptions was filed on September 15, 1902, and it sufficiently appears that the bill had been signed by the judge before it was filed. A party who excepts to the conclusions of law admits, for the purposes of his exceptions, that the facts are correctly found; but such exceptions do not conclude him from controverting the facts in the finding by a motion for a new trial. The same reasoning that gives him this right gives him the right to controvert the facts stated in a pleading, the truth of which he has admitted by a demurrer. Robinson v. Snyder, 74 Ind. 110;Gray v. Taylor, 2 Ind. App. 155, 28 N. E. 220. The motion to dismiss is overruled.
This was an action by appellee upon two alleged contracts of life insurance. The policies were issued by appellant upon the life of Harry G. Hockett, and payable to appellee. Appellant resisted payment on the ground that the policies never took effect during the lifetime of the insured. Upon a special finding of facts the court stated conclusions of law in appellee's favor, and rendered judgment accordingly.
On April 5, 1900, Hockett signed an application to appellant in writing and print for a policy of insurance on his life. In the application it is stipulated that “the policy issued hereon shall not take effect unless the first premium is paid in cash, or a note for extension of time for such payment is accepted by the company at its home office at Indianapolis, Indiana; nor unless such policy is delivered to me while I am in good health.” The policies contain the provision that “this policy shall not take effect unless the first premium is paid in cash; or a note for extension of time for such payment is accepted by the company at its home office in Indianapolis, Indiana; nor unless the insured is in good health at the time of its delivery to him.” The policy makes the application a part of the contract.
The application, consisting in its entirety of the part above mentioned, together with certain questions submitted to the applicant, with his answers thereto, and certain questions, with answers by the examining physician, was received at the home office of appellant on Saturday afternoon, April 7, 1900, and was referred to appellant's medical director, and by him marked “Rejected.” On Monday, April 9, 1900, the application was submitted to appellant's secretary, who passed on applications for acceptance where they had been rejected, who overruled the decision of the medical director, and ordered the application approved, and afterwards on the same day the policies were prepared, dated April 5, 1900, duly signed, and put in the mail at about 5.30 p. m. The policies were received by appellee on the day following.The applicant died on Sunday, April 8, 1900. The annual premium on each policy was $66.73. At the time the application was made on April 5, 1900, Hockett executed to appellant his note, payable at a bank in this state, five years after date, for $333.65, the same being for five annual premiums, and also paid the soliciting agent $83.41 in cash, taking a receipt, which contained the provision: “If this receipt be given for any payment in advance upon a policy applied for, it shall not create any liability on the said company until the application for said policy shall have been received by the said company at its home office in Indianapolis, Indiana, approved by the secretary of said company, and a policy issued thereon.” The note and money, less the soliciting agent's commission, were delivered by him to the company April 7, 1900. On April 12, 1900, a firm of attorneys, representing the estate of the insured and the beneficiary, notified appellant of Hockett's death, and asking for blanks for proof of death. Appellant replied to this letter April 16, 1900, denying liability under the policies, on the ground that the policies were never in effect, and returned the cash premium and note. On April 25, 1900, the attorneys notified appellant that the beneficiary refused to accept the money and note.
The material facts in this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reserve Loan Life Insurance Company v. Hockett
... ... contract could be made that would be effective from any date ... See Roblee v. Masonic Life Assn., etc ... (1902), 38 Misc. 481, 77 N.Y.S. 1098; McClave v ... Mutual Reserve, etc., Assn. (1893), 55 N.J.L. 187, ... 26 A. 78; Paine v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins ... Co. (1892), 51 F. 689, 2 C. C. A. 459; Hawley ... v. Michigan Mut. Life Ins. Co. (1894), 92 Iowa 593, ... 61 N.W. 201; McMaster v. New York Life Ins ... Co. (1899), 99 F. 856, [35 Ind.App. 94] 40 C. C. A. 119; ... Kohen v. Mutual Reserve, etc., Assn ... (1886), 28 F. 705; Coker v ... ...
-
House v. Bankers' Reserve Life Co.
...change any old contractual relations existing between them, whether it had notice of his death or not. The decision of Reserve Life Ins. Co. v. Hockett, 35 Ind. App. 89, is directly in point. In that case the provisions of the application involved were the same as in this; the application w......