Rucker v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co., 24391.
| Citation | 109 S.W.2d 911 |
| Decision Date | 02 November 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 24391.,24391. |
| Parties | RUCKER v. NATIONAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INS. CO. OF NASHVILLE, TENN. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court, Arthur Bader, Judge.
"Not to be published in State Reports."
Suit by Etherline Rucker against the National Life & Accident Insurance Company of Nashville, Tenn. From an adverse judgment, the defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
B. E. Hamilton, of St. Louis, for appellant.
Geo. L. Vaughn, of St. Louis, for respondent.
SUTTON, Commissioner.
This is an action on an insurance policy issued on the life of Johnie Rucker in the sum of $552. Plaintiff, who was the wife of the insured, is the beneficiary named in the policy. The insured died on November 7, 1923. The policy was issued on October 8, 1923. The policy provides that no obligation is assumed by the company unless on the date thereof "the insured is alive and in sound health." Defendant by way of affirmative defense pleads this provision of the policy, and alleges that the insured was on the date of the policy suffering from a kidney disease known as pyonephrosis, from which disease he died.
The trial, with a jury, resulted in a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $1,229.68, as follows: Amount due under policy $552, interest at 6 per cent. per annum from December 1, 1923, $384.07, damages for vexatious refusal to pay $93.61, and attorney's fees $200. Judgment was given accordingly, and defendant appeals.
The case was tried and submitted to the jury, with respect to the liability or not of defendant under the policy, solely on the issue as to whether or not the insured was suffering from pyonephrosis prior to the date of the policy. At the instance of the plaintiff the court instructed the jury that plaintiff, upon putting the policy in evidence and showing the payment of the premiums thereon and the death of the insured, made out a prima facie case, and that the burden was on the defendant to establish its defense by showing to the satisfaction of the jury that at the time of the issuance of the policy to the insured he was suffering from pyonephrosis and that pyonephrosis caused or contributed to his death, and that, unless defendant had so shown, the verdict should be in favor of plaintiff and against the defendant. The converse of this instruction was given at the instance of the defendant.
A further instruction requested by defendant was refused, and its refusal is assigned as error. But, since this refused instruction is substantially the same as the given instruction just referred to, there is no error in its refusal.
Defendant urges that the court committed error in submitting to the jury the question of vexatious refusal to pay the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prince v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
......(Mo. App.), 97 S.W.2d 856; St. Clair v. Washington Fidelity National Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 89. S.W.2d 85; Non Royalty Shoe Co. v. Phoenix ...National Protective Ass'n, 229. Mo.App. 132, 73 S.W.2d 341; Rucker v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co., 109 S.W.2d 911. (6) A case will not. ......
-
Bennett v. National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford
......Co. v. Munger, supra; Prudential Ins. Co. v. German Mutual Life Insurance Association, 228 Mo.App. 139, 60 S.W.2d 1008. (2) No recovery ...Co., 218 Mo.App. 395, 277 S.W. 349;. Rollins v. Business Men's Accident Ass'n,. 204 Mo.App. 679, 220 S.W. 1022; Deskin v. United States. Ins. ...608; 262 S.W. 43; State v. Shain, 334 Mo. 385, 66 S.W.2d 871; Rucker v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co., 109 S.W.2d 911; Terry. v. Woodmen ......
- Reed v. Hunze
- Hunze (Reed) v. Hunze