Saddler v. Cotton States Life & Health Ins. Co., 38215

• Decision Date: 21 June 1960
• Docket Number: 2,Nos. 1,No. 38215,38215,s. 1
• Citation: 101 Ga.App. 866,115 S.E.2d 398
• Parties: Nona H. SADDLER v. COTTON STATES LIFE & HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 398

115 S.E.2d 398

101 Ga.App. 866

Nona H. SADDLER v. COTTON STATES LIFE & HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 38215.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division Nos. 1, 2.

June 21, 1960.

Syllabus by the Court.

Since the petition fails to allege a payment of the full premium specified in the policy or delivery of the policy in accordance with the requirements of the application, it shows on its face that the alleged contract of insurance was not completed so as to render the defendant company liable thereon and the court did not err in sustaining its general demurrer.

Nona H. Saddler filed her petition in the Superior Court of Brantley County against Cotton States Life & Health Insurance Company seeking to recover for alleged life insurance coverage of her late husband. The pertinent allegations of the petition are as follows: 'On February 20, 1958, the defendant by and through its agent accepted an application for insurance No. FP 1603, which included double indemnity benefits if the insured died as the result of external, violent and accidental means, on the life of Aaron Saddler, in the principal amount of $5,000, naming plaintiff as the sole beneficiary; and thereafter issued a policy pursuant to said application, the date of issuance of said policy being unknown to plaintiff, in consideration of the monthly premiums paid and contracted to be paid to defendant, the premium as computed by said company including double indemnity benefits, and the defendant accepted the first full month's premium in advance from said insured in Brantley County, Georgia. It is impossible for plaintiff to attach hereto a copy of said policy because the same is unavailable to plaintiff, but the original policy is in the possession of and available to defendant and its terms and conditions are well known to defendant; a copy of said application is hereto attached, marked Exhibit A, and made a part of this petition. Thereafter, on July 8, 1958, the defendant through its agents, John Foreman, District Sales Manager for the district in which Brantley County, Georgia, is located, and Julian B. Middleton, Brantley County, Georgia, local agent, informed the insured that additional premiums would be due which the insured agreed to pay, and which the defendant's agents agreed to wait to collect until the latter part of July or the first of August, 1958, and also represented to the insured that delivery of the policy would be made at that time, and again represented to the insured just as they had done on February 20, 1958, that the coverage applied for in said application set out above was in full force and effect and that the canceled check for the first full month's premium which they had already accepted and deposited was his receipt. Said agents had the authority to make such representation, were acting within the scope of their employment, they were binding on the defendant, and was the customary method by which the defendant handled such transactions in the course of its regular business, and the defendant had so instructed these agents at previous company sales meetings, the time, place, and director of such meetings being unknown to plaintiff but are well known to defendant. Plaintiff shows that the insured died on July 16, 1958, as the result of external violent and accidental gunshot wound which was unforeseen, unexpected, and unusual within the terms and coverage of said application and policy and the representations made by defendant's agents as set out above, and for which defendant is liable to plaintiff as beneficiary in the sum of $10,000 under the double indemnity features and coverage provided by defendant to the insured under said application and representations of defendant's agents, said premiums having been computed and collected and accepted by defendant to include said coverage. Plaintiff shows that the defendant had due notice of said death by letter dated August 12, 1958, and refused to extend plaintiff the common courtesy of any reply whatsoever. Plaintiff further shows that payment of the additional premium which was due on said application and policy according to the representations of said agents was tendered to the agent of defendant on August 12, 1958 by check in the amount of $65.10, and that she has otherwise performed all the conditions imposed by said application, policy, and said representations of said defendant's agents. It is impossible for plaintiff to attach hereto a copy of said policy because the defendant has refused to deliver the same or accept the additional premium due, but the terms and conditions of said policy are well known to the defendant. On the date of the death of the insured as set out above, the application accepted by defendant on the date of its issuance was in full force and effect, and the policy subsequently issued by defendant was in full force and effect. The insured had no notice of any limitation of the agents' authority to waive any of the provisions in said application and policy and relied on said representations made by said agents that the coverage applied for was in full force and effect upon the payment by the insured in advance of the pull first month's premium, which he paid by check and which was accepted by the defendant. The application was not...