United Sec. Life Ins. Co. v. Harden

Decision Date09 May 1963
Docket Number1 Div. 90
CitationUnited Sec. Life Ins. Co. v. Harden, 153 So.2d 246, 275 Ala. 169 (Ala. 1963)
PartiesUNITED SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Isalah HARDEN.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

S. P. Keith, Jr., Birmingham, for appellant.

J. Glenn Cobb, Jr., Mobile, for appellee.

LAWSON, Justice.

Appellee sued appellant on two insurance policies.One policy insured the lives of appellee and his wife.The other was a hospital benefits policy which covered appellee and his wife.Both policies became effective on September 1, 1959, and were issued under the 'Brookley Group Insurance Plan,' which insured some of the civilian employees at Brookley Air Force Base in or near Mobile.

Appellee's wife died in a hospital on or about October 13, 1959, while undergoing an operation for the removal of a fibroid tumor.This suit followed shortly thereafter.

Appellantdefendant on the ground that its action in issuing the policies was based on false representations concerning the state of the health of appellee's wife made by appellee in his application for insurance.

The application was not made a part of the policy, although the 'Standard Provisions' of the policy include.

'1.This policy includes the endorsements and attached papers, if any, and does not contain the entire contract of insurance. * * *

'2.No statement made by the applicant for insurance not included herein shall avoid the policy or be used in any legal proceeding hereunder. * * *'

These contractual provisions made misrepresentations in the application immaterial, since the application is not made a part of the policy.United Security Life Ins. Co. v. Wisener, 40 Ala.App. 350, 113 So.2d 530.SeeThompson v. Prudential Inc. Co. of America, 196 Minn. 372, 265 N.W. 28.

The provisions of the policies or certificates issued to appellee under the master policy govern if there is a conflict between the master policy and the policies or certificates issued to appellee.All States Life Ins. Co. v. Kelso, 29 Ala.App. 310, 195 So. 460.

Reversible error is not made to appear in connection with the admission in evidence of the bill from the South Alabama Infirmary of Grove Hill, Alabama, which bill included the charges for hospitalization and doctors' fees.The bill was admitted under a stipulation of counsel to the effect that no objection was interposed thereto.The record shows in this connection the following:

'Mr. Keith: We previously stipulated we would make no objection to this.Under our stipulation as to the showing of Dr. Neal, we admit the bona fides of that bill.'

The appellant insists that the verdict was excessive in the amount of $500 in that the appellee, Isaiah Harden, had executed an instrument wherein he assigned an interest in the policies to the extent of $500 to Hodges Funeral Chapel, Inc.We do not construe the instrument relied upon as being anything more than an agreement whereby Isaiah Harden contracted to pay over to Hodges Funeral Chapel the sum of $500 out of the proceeds due to him as beneficiary of the policies sued upon.

There was no acceptance of the assignment by the insurer.An assignment after loss to be legally effective without acceptance must...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
6 cases
  • In re Healthsouth Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • March 16, 2004
    ...in the statute, thereby waiving one or more of the statutory grounds. Oliver, 854 F.2d at 419-20 (citing United Sec. Life Ins. Co. v. Harden, 275 Ala. 169, 153 So.2d 246, 247 (1963)). The insureds argue that, under the Alabama rescission statute, a written application must actually correspo......
  • Humphrey v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of America
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • October 26, 1967
    ...220, 222; Clauson v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America (D.C.Mass.1961) 195 F.Supp. 72, 78--79; United Security Life Insurance Company v. Harden (1963) 275 Ala. 169, 153 So.2d 246, 247; Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Foster (1934) 188 Ark. 1116, 69 S.W.2d 869, 870). This result is easily ......
  • Colvin v. Louisiana Hospital Service, Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • October 1, 1975
    ...1939); Clauson v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 195 F.Supp. 72, 78--79 (D.C.Mass.1961); United Security Life Insurance Company v. Harden, 275 Ala. 167, 153 So.2d 246, 247 (1963); Missouri State Life Insurance Company v. Foster, 188 Ark. 1116, 69 S.W.2d 869, 870 (1934). This resul......
  • Martin v. Oklahoma Farmers Union
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 31, 1981
    ...1939); Clauson v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 195 F.Supp. 72, 78-79 (D.C.Mass.1961); United Security Life Insurance Company v. Harden, 275 Ala. 169, 153 So.2d 246, 247 (1963); Missouri State Life Insurance Company v. Foster, 188 Ark. 1116, 69 S.W.2d 869, 870 (1934). This result......
  • Get Started for Free