Western & Southern Life Ins. Co. v. Galvin

• Decision Date: 05 June 1902
• Citation: 68 S.W. 655
• Parties: WESTERN & SOUTHERN LIFE INS. CO. v. GALVIN et al. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

68 S.W. 655

WESTERN & SOUTHERN LIFE INS. CO. v. GALVIN et al. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 5, 1902

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county, common pleas division.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by J. W. Galvin and Wallace T. Galvin against the Western &amp Southern Life Insurance Company on a policy of life insurance. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Richards & Ronald, for appellant.

Forcht & Field, for appellees.

WHITE J.

The appellant issued its policy of insurance on the life of Sallie E. Galvin, by which it promised and agreed to pay within 24 hours after proper proofs of death had been presented, the sum of $390. The policy does not in express terms designate a beneficiary to whom the amount is payable but contains a clause as follows: "The production by the company of this policy, and of a receipt for the sum paid signed by any person furnishing proof satisfactory to the company that he or she is an executor or administrator, husband or wife, or relative by blood, or lawful beneficiary, of the insured, shall be conclusive evidence that such sum has been paid to and received by the person or persons lawfully entitled to the same, and that all claims and demands upon said company under this policy have been fully satisfied." Proper proof of death having been furnished, and payment not having been made, this action was brought by J. W. Galvin, the husband of Sallie E. Galvin, individually and as guardian for Wallace T. Galvin, the only child and heir at law. The petition alleges all the facts showing the contract, death, proof of death, and the relationship of the plaintiffs to the deceased, and then alleges that in the application for insurance there was a beneficiary named, to whom the sum due on the policy should be paid, and that designation was either the husband, J. W. Galvin, or the son, Wallace T. Galvin, but that as to which person was so named appellees did not know, but that it was one or the other, and that the application and the knowledge of its contents were in the exclusive possession of appellant company, and a recovery was sought. Appellant filed a demurrer to the petition, which was overruled, and, failing to plead, there was a judgment by confession, and hence this appeal.

It is insisted that the application is no part of the policy, as a copy of same was not returned with the policy, as we held in the cases of Society...