Self v. American Nat. Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 09 May 1935
• Docket Number: 24567.
• Parties: SELF v. AMERICAN NAT. INS. CO.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

180 S.E. 21

51 Ga.App. 251

SELF v. AMERICAN NAT. INS. CO.

No. 24567.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division

May 9, 1935

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Petition by widow of beneficiary of life policy, alleging that plaintiff paid premiums after beneficiary's death on misrepresentation of insurer's agent that plaintiff would recover amount of policy on insured's death held to show that payment was to be made to insured's administrator or executrix, in event beneficiary predeceased insured, precluding recovery in suit ex contractu on policy, where petition alleged that agent's rep resentation was contrary to terms of policy and that insurer refused payment except to insured's administrator or executrix, "pursuant to the terms of the policy."

Petition by widow of beneficiary of life policy, alleging that plaintiff paid premiums, retained by insurer, after beneficiary's death on misrepresentation of insurer's "agent" that plaintiff "would" recover amount of policy on insured's death, which insurer refused to pay, stated no cause of action ex delicto, because category and authority of "agent" were not set out plaintiff knew as much as "agent" concerning terms of policy, and "misrepresentation" constituted no more than promise.

Error from Superior Court, Richmond County; A. L. Franklin, Judge.

Suit by Henrietta Self against the American National Insurance Company. To review a judgment dismissing her petition upon general and special demurrers, plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

Paul T. Chance and Nathan Jolles, both of Augusta, for plaintiff in error.

Rodney S. Cohen, of Augusta, for defendant in error.

Syllabus OPINION.

JENKINS Presiding Judge.

The widow of a deceased beneficiary of an insurance policy insuring the life of her deceased husband's sister, sued the insurance company in tort for the recovery, as damages, of $8, premiums paid by the plaintiff, the $200 face amount of the policy, and $1,200 as punitive damages. By amendment the $200 claim was stricken. The amended petition, in effect, alleged: That after the death of her husband, the beneficiary, plaintiff paid the premiums on the policy until the death of the insured; that "Mr. Smith, the agent of the defendant company, represented to your petitioner that, if the premiums would be continued after the death of [her husband], your petitioner would recover the amount of said insurance upon the death of [the insured], and your petitioner relied upon such representation"; that "said representations were made with utter disregard of the terms of said policy and contrary to the terms of the same, and your petitioner, being uneducated and not familiar with such matters, was easily imposed upon by said defendant company"; that "she would not have continued the payment of the premiums on said policy unless the company would pay to her the amount of said insurance, and that said representations were false and were made knowingly so by the agent, who was charged with the knowledge contained in the policy"; that, upon the death of the insured, "she presented proofs of death and made claim for said face of the policy, and the company refused to pay the same and averred that it would pay only to the administrator or executrix of the estate of [the insured], pursuant to the terms of the...