Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman
Decision Date | 19 May 1978 |
Citation | 358 So.2d 1025 |
Parties | SOUTHERN LIFE AND HEALTH INS. CO., a corp. v. Rebecca WHITMAN. SOUTHERN LIFE AND HEALTH INS. CO., a corp. v. Samuel J. WHITMAN et al. 77-61, 77-62. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Ollie L. Blan, Jr., Birmingham, John F. Dillon, IV, Alexander City, Kenneth E. Little, Birmingham, for appellant.
Ernest C. Hornsby and Steven F. Schmitt, Tallassee, for appellees.
Ira L. Burleson and Robert H. Neill, Birmingham, for Ass'n of Alabama Life Ins. Companies, amicus curiae.
Plaintiffs brought actions on the insurance contract and for fraud against Southern Life and Health Insurance Company on each of two $1,000 industrial life insurance policies. Southern Life appeals from the jury award of two $1,000,000 judgments. We reverse and remand.
Mr. Whitman, a 63 year old man with numerous health problems, received two unsolicited $1,000 "instant issue" policies from the defendant, through its soliciting agent, Redding. When Whitman indicated that there must have been a mistake because of his bad health, and, at any rate, he could not afford the premiums, Redding suggested that Whitman's children purchase the policies. Redding filled out the application in Whitman's presence, erroneously stating that the insured was in good health and had not been attended by a physician during the past three years. With Whitman's consent, Redding sold one policy to Samuel and Kathleen Whitman and the other to Rebecca Whitman (who were all aware of the insured's health), naming the purchasers as beneficiaries.
The effective date of the policies was September 1, 1974. The insured died on August 12, 1975. Although Southern Life honored several older policies on the deceased, they denied coverage on these two policies because of the insured's bad health and refunded the premiums. While not found in the insured's file when the policies were approved, Southern Life allegedly had issued a "bad risk" card on the insured.
Plaintiffs filed suits on each policy, asserting a claim on the policies in the amount of $1,000 as Count I, and seeking under Count II $2,500,000 punitive damages for fraud and deceit on the part of the defendant in inducing the plaintiffs to purchase the policies. The actions were consolidated for a jury trial.
At trial, the following evidence of the defendant's financial position was admitted over defendant's objection for the express purpose of aiding the jury in its assessment of punitive damages:
The trial court granted a directed verdict for the defendant on Count I and submitted Count II to the jury. The jury returned two $1,000,000 verdicts for the plaintiffs. Defendant's motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or in the alternative for New Trial was denied.
Appellant raises numerous contentions of reversible error. Because of the extreme prejudice created by the evidence of the defendant's wealth, reversal is mandated, and consideration of the remaining errors is pretermitted.
Our cases have long held that evidence of the defendant's wealth is highly prejudicial and, therefore, inadmissible. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. v. Williams, 207 Ala. 99, 91 So. 879 (1921) (dicta); Long v. Seigel, 177 Ala. 338, 58 So. 380 (1912); Southern Car & Foundry Co. v. Adams, 131 Ala. 147, 32 So. 503 (1901); Ware v. Cartledge, 24 Ala. 622, 60 Am.Dec. 489 (1854). Cf. Miller v. Dacovich, 12 A.B.R. 469 (1978); Pool v. Devers, 30 Ala. 672 (1857); Adams v. Adams, 29 Ala. 433 (1856). These cases recognize no distinction between situations involving compensatory and punitive damages.
In Ware, the plaintiff was permitted to prove, over objection, that the defendant possessed property valued at $20,000. Reversing the trial court, this court said that if wealth of a defendant is permitted then common justice requires a converse rule to prevail in the case of poor defendants. Justice Ligon wrote that common sense revolts at the adoption of such a rule. (Citing cases.) Not only have our cases held that the wealth...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hilgedick v. Koehring Finance Corp.
...in Alabama are prohibited from receiving evidence of defendant's wealth in assessing punitive damages. (Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman (Ala.1978) 358 So.2d 1025, 1026-1027.) Conversely, California demands that such proof be presented to the jury. "Also to be considered is the we......
-
Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Johnson
...the jury. Evidence of a defendant's wealth or financial standing has never been admissible in a jury trial. Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 358 So.2d 1025 (Ala.1978); and Ware v. Cartledge, 24 Ala. 622, 627 (1854). This principle was reinforced by the fact that the Hammond/ Gree......
-
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Haslip
...Any evidence of Pacific Mutual's wealth was excluded from the trial in accord with Alabama law. See Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 358 So.2d 1025, 1026-1027 (Ala.1978). To be sure, the instructions gave the jury significant discretion in its determination of punitive damages. B......
-
Johnson v. Hugo's Skateway
...law, consideration of defendant's wealth was not permitted. Id. at ----, 111 S.Ct. at 1044 (citing Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 358 So.2d 1025, 1026-27 (Ala.1978)). The Court acknowledged that the instructions "gave the jury significant discretion in its determination of puni......
-
CHAPTER 15
...of Pacific Mutual’s wealth was excluded from the trial in accord with Alabama law. See Southern Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Whitman, 358 So. 2d 1025, 1026-1027 (Ala. 1978). To be sure, the instructions gave the jury significant discretion in its determination of punitive damages. But that dis......
-
How to defend punitive damages claims effectively--and maybe successfully.
...Shane v. Rhines, 672 P.2d 895 (Alaska 1983); Fowler v. Mantooth, 683 S.W.2d 250, 253 (Ky. 1984); Texas Pub. Util. Corp. v. Edwards, 358 So.2d 1025 (Ala. (47.) Kitch, supra note 1, at 16. (48.) Id. (49.) See, e.g., Motsch v. Pine Roofing Co., 533 N.E.2d 1 (Ill.App. 1989). (50.) Kitch, supra ......