Streeter v. Western Union Mut. Life & Acc. Soc.

• Decision Date: 15 February 1887
• Citation: 65 Mich. 199,31 N.W. 779
• Parties: STREETER, Adm'r, etc., v. WESTERN UNION MUT. LIFE ACCIDENT SOC. OF U.S.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

31 N.W. 779

65 Mich. 199

STREETER, Adm'r, etc., v. WESTERN UNION MUT. LIFE ACCIDENT SOC. OF U.S.

Supreme Court of Michigan

February 15, 1887

Error to superior court of Detroit.

Action on a life insurance policy. Upon the trial the court directed a verdict for defendant.

E.J. Ensign, (Edwin F. Conely, of counsel,) for plaintiff and appellant.

Griffin & Warner, for defendant.

CHAMPLIN J.

The policy of insurance introduced in evidence in this cause contained the following clause: "If the insured shall within three years of the date of this policy, die by his own hand, sane or insane, this policy shall become and be null and void." Within three years from the date of the policy the insured died from the effects of a pistol-shot wound inflicted upon himself. The evidence tended to prove that when he shot himself he was insane. Witnesses expressed the opinion that his mental condition was such that he was unable to control any of his physical actions that might have been called upon to carry out any one of his impulses. It is not claimed that the self-destruction of the insured was accidental. The court below construed the language of the policy above quoted as covering all acts of self-destruction whether felonious or not, and was meant to excuse the company from liability when the suicide was the result of insanity and in itself an insane act; that the words "sane or insane," in this case, not only meant to qualify the meaning of "die by his own hand," as defined by law, but that they actually do so. Counsel for plaintiff contends that the phrase, "die by his own hand," had a well-understood signification in the law of insurance that when the defendant insurance company selected such expression, and inserted it in its policy, it should be held to have used it in its legal sense, namely, as meaning, "shall voluntarily and intentionally take his own life;" that, by adding the words "sane or insane," the defendant had not caused the expression, "die by his own hand," to mean something which it did not mean without such addition, but had used a combined expression, which was tantamount to saying, "shall voluntarily and intentionally take his own life, sane or insane;" that if the expressions, "die by his own hand," and "sane or insane," were incongruous or inconsistent, the beneficiaries under the policy should not suffer by it; that in his opinion, however, they were not incongruous or inconsistent, but could legally and scientifically combine, and stand together without conflict, as both voluntary and involuntary self-killing were compatible with insanity.

We are unable to agree with the construction which the learned counsel for the plaintiff places upon the clause of the contract in question. The subject is not a new one in the courts. The precise question came before the United States supreme court in Bigelow v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 93 U.S. 284, when Mr. Justice DAVIS, in an able and exhaustive opinion, so fully reviews the subject, and the construction to be placed upon the term "sane or insane," as to render a further discussion of the subject unnecessary. It has also received attention in the following cases: De Gogorza v. Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co., 65 N.Y. 232; Pierce v. Travelers' Ins. Co., 34 Wis. 389; Salentine v. Mutual Ben. Life Ins. Co., 24 F. 159; Riley v. Hartford Life & Annuity Ins. Co., 25 F. 315.

It was said by Mr. Justice DAVIS in Bigelow v. Insurance Co., supra that "the policy was rendered void if the insured was conscious of the physical nature of his act, and intended by it to cause his death, although at the time he was incapable of judging between right and wrong, and of understanding the moral consequences of what he was doing." It was claimed in this case that, if the insured was unconscious of the act he was committing, it was merely an accident, and was not within the intent and meaning of the terms of the policy. But the learned judge said that the term, "wholly unconscious of the act," refers to the real nature and character of the act as a crime, and not to the act itself. He further said that "Bigelow knew he was taking his own life, and showed sufficient intelligence to employ a loaded pistol to accomplish his purpose;...