Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Pulling

• Decision Date: 11 October 1895
• Citation: 159 Ill. 603,43 N.E. 762
• Parties: TRAVELERS' INS. CO. v. PULLING.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

159 Ill. 603

43 N.E. 762

TRAVELERS' INS. CO.

v.PULLING.¹

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 11, 1895.

Appeal from appellate court, First district.

Action by H. B. N. Pulling against the Travelers' Insurance Company. From a judgment of the appellate court reversing a judgment for defendant (55 Ill. App. 452), it appeals. Affirmed.L. M. Paine and C. C. Bonney, for appellant.

St. John, French & Merriam, for appellee.

On the 15th day of January, 1873, Howell G. Pulling took out a policy of life insurance in the Travelers' Insurance Company, of Hartford, Conn., on the ordinary life plan, insuring his life in the sum of $10,000, which, by the terms of the policy, was made payable to his wife, Helen B. N. Pulling. The annual premium was $186, but it was payable, as provided in the policy, in semiannual payments of $95.79 each, on the 15th of January and July. It was provided, in condition 3 of the policy, ‘that, if any subsequent premium on this policy, or any installments thereof, or any note given for premium, or any part thereof, shall not be paid on or before the day specified for the payment of the same, then this policy shall cease and determine.’ The insured paid to John H. Nolan, of Chicago, general agent of appellee, all premiums, as they became due by the terms of the policy, up to and including January 15, 1880, amounting in the aggregate to $1,436.85, and Nolan countersigned and delivered premium receipts for said payments. It was also provided, in the third condition of the policy, as follows: ‘That no premium hereon shall be considered as paid, unless a receipt shall be given therefor, signed by the president or secretary of the company.’ A similar provision is contained in the notice to the policy holder, indorsed on the back of the policy. On the 15th day of July, 1880, when the semiannual installments of premium became due on the policy, the insurance company, through its local general agent at Chicago, Ill., accepted a demand note of Howell G. Pulling for such installment of premium, and $25.75, due on the policy of accident insurance of said Howell G. Pulling, was added to and became a part of the consideration of said note, which note is as follows: ‘$121.54. Chicago, Ill., July 15, 1880. On demand, after date, I promise to pay to the order of the Travelers' Insurance Company, of Hartford, Connecticut, one hundred and twenty-one 54/100 dollars, at 177 La Salle street, for value received. It is expressly stipulated that payment in full of this note at its maturity is absolutely essential to the renewal of this policy, No. 15,804, and that, in case this note is not paid at maturity,the said the Travelers' Insurance Company shall be wholly released from any claim or demand whatever on said policy, and the same shall become null and void, and of no effect. H. G. Pulling.’ Upon accepting the note, and as a part of the transaction, the appellee delivered its properly executed premium receipt, which receipt is as follows: ‘[Combined.] Renewal Receipt, Life Department. The Travelers' Insurance Company, Hartford, Conn. Policy No. 15,804. Premium, $121.54. Received one hundred and twenty-one 54/100 dollars, continuing in force policy No. 15,804, with indemnity contract thereto attached, on life of Howell G. Pulling, for six months from the 15th day of July, 1880. Rodney Dennis, Secretary. Countersigned at Chicago this 15th day of July, 1880. J. H. Nolan, General Agent.’ On the 14th day of January, 1881, the day before the next semiannual premium became due, Pulling, being absent from Chicago, arranged with John Platner to pay the premium, and also the note which had previously been executed. John Platner, on January 14, 1881, informed John H. Nolan that on the next day he would pay the installments of premium then due on the life of said Pulling, and would also pay the note given by said Pulling on July 15, 1880; and said Nolan informed said Platner that he need not, then or thereafter, bring any money for that purpose, that Pulling owed appellee nothing, and that said policy was canceled and forfeited, but gave no reasons therefor. On said 15th of January, 1881, said Platner went to the office of said agent, at Chicago, with sufficient money to pay said premium, and take up said note and interest, and then and there offered to pay said agent said premium and said note, and said agent then and there refused to accept such payment, and refused to give the premium receipt, and told said Platner that said Pulling owed the company nothing, and that no payment would, then or thereafter, be accepted on said policy, or on said note, and that said policy was canceled and forfeited. Said Platner would have paid said premium and said note had not said agent declared said policy canceled and forfeited, and prevented the performance of said contract by and on behalf of appellant. On July 15, 1881, said Pulling, in company with Bernhard Moos, went to the office of appellee, at Chicago, with $375 in money, and then and there offered to pay said Nolan, such general agent, the demand note given July 15, 1880, and the interest thereon and the premium due January 15, 1881, and interest, and the premium due July 15, 1881,...