Sherman v. Provident American Insurance Company
Decision Date | 19 May 1966 |
Docket Number | No. 6841,6841 |
Citation | 404 S.W.2d 340 |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Parties | Atley SHERMAN et ux., Appellants, v. PROVIDENT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. . Beaumont |
Daylee Wiggins, Beaumont, for appellants.
Dale Dowell and John Rienstra, Jr., Beaumont, G. H. Kelsoe, Jr., Dallas, for appellee.
Plaintiff, Atley Sherman, sued Provident American Insurance Company upon a contract of insurance, being a cash hospital indemnity policy, issued to him by said company, in connection with the hospitalization of his wife, Florence Sherman. Trial was to a jury but upon defendant's motion for instructed verdict, after plaintiff had rested his case, judgment was entered that Atley Sherman have and recover nothing of and from the defendant, Provident American Insurance Company.
The insuring clause of this policy reads as follows:
'Provident American Insurance Company (herein called Company) HEREBY INSURES the Applicant, first named in the following Schedule, hereinafter called the Insured, and will pay, subject to all provisions and limitations herein contained, the benefits provided herein for expense of hospital confinement commencing while this policy is in force and other specified expenses incurred while this policy is in force by the Insured or any member of the Insured's family, if any, named in said Schedule (all of whom, including the Insured, are hereinafter called the Family Group) (a) resulting from accidental bodily injury sustained while this policy is in force, hereinafter referred to as such injury; and (b) resulting from sickness, the cause which originates after the effective date of this policy and while this policy is in effect, hereinafter referred to as such sickness.'
We omit the details as to the hospital room rate and other expenses of the hospitalization set forth in the policy. The defendant insurance company pleaded a general denial and all of the provisions and limitations in said policy as defenses together with a specific pleading in defense to the plaintiff's action of the exclusions and limitations contained in said policy including but not limited to part 9 as follows:
'1. This policy does not cover any loss or disability resulting wholly or partly, in or from (1) any attempt at suicide, while sane or insane; (2) rest cures, nervous or mental disorders, dental treatment- ; (3) participating in aeronautics, except as a fare-paying passenger in a licensed aircraft provided by a common carrier traveling on an established passenger route; (4) military or naval service or war; (5) venereal disease; (6) injury or sickness while confined to any institution wherein the Insured is entitled to services without cost to himself; (7) hospitalization for which the principal purpose is diagnosis.
2. Any loss or disability resulting wholly or partly in or from sickness or disease involving a kidney or kidneys, cancer, hernia, gall bladder, ulcers, tuberculosis, diabetes, arthritis, rheumatism, asthma, sinusitis, enteritis, gastritis, tonsillitis, bronchitis, apoplexy, loss...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sherman v. Provident Am. Ins. Co., A--11604
...the trial court rendered judgment for the defendant. On appeal to the Court of Civil Appeals the trial court's judgment was affirmed. 404 S.W.2d 340. In order to give this Court jurisdiction of this case a conflict is alleged to exist between the holding of the Court of Civil Appeals in the......
-
Life & Cas. Ins. Co. of Tenn. v. Rivera
...exclusions to the limitations contained in the policy pleaded as a defense by the defendant's answer. Citing Sherman et ux v. Provident American Insurance Co., 404 S.W.2d 340 (Tex.Civ.App.--Beaumont 1966, affirmed 421 S.W.2d 652, Tex.1967). It is true that where an insurance company issues ......
-
Bankers Life & Casualty Company v. Goodall
...therefore, affirmed. 1 Mutual Benefit Health and Accident Association v. Hudman, Tex., 398 S.W.2d 110; Sherman v. Provident American Insurance Company, Tex.Civ.App., 1966, 404 S.W.2d 340. 2 Necaise v. Chrysler Corporation, 5 Cir., 1964, 335 F.2d 3 Lavender v. Kurn, 327 U.S. 645, 66 S.Ct. 74......