Sprinkle v. Knights Templar & Masons' Indem. Co

• Decision Date: 11 April 1899
• Citation: 32 S.E. 734,124 N.C. 406
• Parties: SPRINKLE. v. KNIGHTS TEMPLAR & MASONS' INDEMNITY CO.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

32 S.E. 734

(124 N.C. 406)

SPRINKLE.

v.KNIGHTS TEMPLAR & MASONS' INDEMNITY CO.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 11, 1899.

Insurance—Knowledge op Agent—Fraud. An insurance company is not bound by the knowledge of its agent, who, in drawing the application for assured, fraudulently falsified

assured's answers concerning his health, with concurrence of assured, to prevent rejection of the application.

Appeal from superior court Madison county; Greene, Judge.

Action by J. B. Sprinkle against the Knights Templar & Masons' Indemnity Company. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

W. W. Zachary and Geo. A. Shuford, for appellant.

J. M. Gudger, Jr., and J. H. Merrimon, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY, J. On the 15th of October, 1896, a policy of insurance was issued by defendant company to George R. Sprinkle; the beneficiary named being the father of the insured, and the plaintiff in this action. On the 24th of February, 1897, a little more than four months after the date of the policy, the insured died. This action was brought by the plaintiff, the beneficiary, to recover the amount specified in the policy. It is not denied that the statements and representations embraced In the answers of the insured, as they appear in the writing called the "application, " concerning his health prior to and at the time when the application was made, were material to the risk to be assumed by the company, and that the insurance was issued upon them, and upon his agreement, at the end of the application and answers, that, if the same are in any respect false, the policy to be issued upon them to be void. The defendant, in its answer, averred that the policy was void because the insured, in his application, made and signed false and fraudulent answers and representations to questions put to him concerning his health prior to and at the time of the application, and particularly as follows: In answer to the question: "Have you had, or been afflicted, since your childhood, with, any of the following complaints: Disease of the lungs or pulmonary complaints, spitting or raising of blood, bronchitis, asthma, rheumatism, general debility, or any serious disease?" he answered "No, " when in truth and in fact he had had serious pulmonary complaints, with hemorrhage, and also pleurisy. In his replication, the plaintiff alleged that the Insured made truthful answers to the questions in the application, stating at the time to Parker, the defendant's agent, that he had had the measles, spitting or raising of blood, pleurisy, and grippe, and that he had had a serious illness, but that, in the face of that statement, Parker, the agent, wrote in the application the answer to the question, "No"; that is, that the insured had had no such diseases. On the trial the plaintiff testified that he was with his son, the insured, when the application was made and signed by the insured, and that he knew the insured had had measles, pleurisy, and grippe, and that the insured had told him that he had had hemorrhages. The physician who made the physical examination (a Dr. Jay) was present when the application was made, and testified on the trial that he heard the insured say, in the hearing and presence of the agent who was filling up the application for the insured to sign, that he (the insured) had had hemorrhages, had coughed, and spit up blood, and that he had had measles, and also pleurisy: that he (Dr. Jay), in the course of the examination of the insured, when he came across the question, "Has the person had any serious illness, " stopped to discuss the question with the agent, he knowing that the applicant had had serious diseases, when he was told by Parker not to write down the true answer, because the policy would be rejected by the company if he did, but to write down a false answer, —the answer that the...