Thetford v. Modern Woodmen of America
Citation | 273 S.W. 666 |
Decision Date | 22 April 1925 |
Docket Number | (No. 6817.) |
Parties | THETFORD v. MODERN WOODMEN OF AMERICA. |
Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
Appeal from District Court, Denton County; C. R. Pearman, Judge.
Action by D. T. Thetford against the Modern Woodmen of America. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and remanded for new trial.
Geo. M. Hopkins and Brent C. Jackson, both of Denton, for appellant.
Truman Plantz, of Warsaw, Ill., Geo. G. Perrin, of Rock Island, Ill., and Sullivan, Speer & Minor, of Denton, for appellee.
On June 6, 1910, the appellee, a fraternal beneficiary society, issued to James Bert Thetford, to whom we will refer as Bert Thetford, a benefit certificate for $3,000, payable, on the death of Bert Thetford, to his father, the appellant herein. The application showed that Bert Thetford was born February 14, 1892. He was not married, and lived with his father at his home in Denton county until about September 15, 1913, when he disappeared, having the month previous been indicted by the grand jury of Denton county on three bills charging forgery, and released on bail bonds. All assessments and dues under the certificate were paid up to and including the month of December, 1920, and later appellant made demand upon appellee for payment of the certificate, basing his claim that Bert Thetford was dead upon the presumption of absence for 7 years "beyond sea or elsewhere," as provided in R. S. art. 5707. Thereafter, on March 10, 1922, appellant brought this suit against appellee, seeking to recover the amount of the certificate and the statutory penalty and attorney's fees.
The cause was tried to a jury upon special issues, and, upon the jury finding that Bert Thetford was not dead at the time appellee made the demand for payment, judgment was rendered in favor of appellee. The appeal is from this judgment upon 15 assignments of error.
Assignments numbered 1, 9, 2, 15, 3, 10, 4, 5, and 12 will be first stated and considered in the order named. These assignments predicate error upon the following rulings of the trial court:
(1) In permitting appellant to testify on cross-examination that, after Bert Thetford left home in September, 1913, John Thetford came to appellant's home and stated to him that he left Bert at Blossomville, Miss., running a tractor.
(9) In refusing a special charge to the jury that this testimony "was hearsay, and was improperly admitted, and you will disregard the same in arriving at a verdict."
(2 and 15) In permitting testimony of Ray Goode to the effect that he had seen a man in 1917 in the army whom he believed to be Bert Thetford.
(3 and 10) In admitting in evidence the indictments and proceedings in connection therewith.
(4) In refusing a peremptory instruction in favor of appellant for the amount of the certificate and the statutory penalty and attorney's fees.
(5) In refusing an alternative peremptory instruction in favor of appellant for the amount of the certificate.
(12) In rendering judgment in favor of appellee upon the "legal evidence" adduced.
It will be observed that these assignments relate to the character of evidence admissible, and the sufficiency of the proof, to rebut the statutory presumption of death from 7 years' absence "beyond sea or elsewhere."
There was no controversy as to the following facts: That the certificate was issued as alleged, and all assessments and dues paid thereon up to and including December, 1920; that on September 15, 1913, Bert Thetford was 21 years old, unmarried, in good health, and was living at his father's home in Denton county; that in August, 1913, the three indictments were returned against him; that he was arrested, released on bond, and about September 15, 1913, left home and never returned; that later his bonds were forfeited, and reward was offered for his arrest and return to the officers.
In his examination in chief, appellant testified:
His cross-examination, which embodies the testimony objected to, reads:
On redirect examination, he testified:
We quote in full the testimony of Ray Goode, which was objected to as being insufficient to identify Serg. Parker as Bert Thetford:
Cross-examination:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McAdoo v. Met. Life Ins. Co.
...(N.S.) 178; Metropolitan v. Lyons, 50 Ind. App. 534, 98 N.E. 824; Gorham v. Settegast, 44 Tex. Civ. App. 254, 94 S.W. 665; Thetford v. Modern Woodmen, 273 S.W. 666; Styles v. Hawkins (Tex.), 207 S.W. 89; Re Tobin, 15 N.Y.S. 749; Smith v. Smith, 49 Ala. 156; Thomas v. Thomas, 16 Neb. 553, 20......
-
Walker v. Johnston
...Life Ins. Co., supra; St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. of Texas v. Parks (1903) 97 Tex. 131, 76 S.W. 740; Thetford v. Modern Woodmen of America ((Tex.Civ.App.) 1925, Austin) 273 S.W. 666 (Syl. Referring specifically to matters of venue, would it be seriously contended that the part of Rule 86,......
-
McAdoo v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
... ... 1, 220 S.W. 716; Eylar v. Prudential Insurance Company of ... America, 89 S.W.2d 150. (2) Evidence insufficient to ... establish commonlaw ... 60, 48 N.E. 1068; Stinchfield v ... Emerson, 52 Me. 465; Modern Woodmen v ... Michelin, 101 Okla. 217, 225 P. 163, 36 A. L. R. 971; ... Settegast, 44 Tex. Civ. App ... 254, 94 S.W. 665; Thetford v. Modern Woodmen, 273 ... S.W. 666; Styles v. Hawkins (Tex.), 207 ... ...
-
Modern Order of Praetorians v. Griffin
... ... Sovereign Camp v. Downer, 241 S.W. 228; ... Sovereign Camp v. Nigh, 223 S.W. 291; Thetford ... v. Modern Woodmen of America, 273 S.W. 666. The home ... office of the Praetorians, being in ... ...