Wing v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co.
| Citation | 314 Mass. 269,49 N.E.2d 905 |
| Parties | WING v. JOHN HANCOCK MUT. LIFE INS. CO. |
| Decision Date | 29 June 1943 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Bristol County, Warner Judge.
Action by Edith V. Wing, administratrix of the estate of Frank R. Wing against the John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company to recover disability payments allegedly due under a certificate issued to the deceased under a group insurance policy. The trial justice directed a verdict for defendant and plaintiff brings exceptions.
Exceptions overruled.
Before FIELD, C. J., and DONAHUE LUMMUS, and QUA, JJ.
W. B. Perry Jr., of New Bedford, for plaintiff.
M. R. Brownell, of New Bedford, for defendant.
The plaintiff brings this action to recover disability payments alleged to have fallen due to her intestate, Frank R. Wing, in his lifetime, while he was insured by the defendant under a group insurance policy issued by the defendant to Wing's employer, Associated Gas and Electric Company, hereinafter called the employer.
There was evidence that Wing had ‘signed an application with’ the employer for employees' insurance; that in the application he had authorized the employer to deduct the premiums from his pay and ‘to consider and report the amount contributed toward the cost of such insurance as additional compensation’ to him; that Wing did not then know in what company he was applying; that weekly thereafter a certain amount was taken by the employer out of Wing's wages as his contribution toward the premiums; that the employer contributed the balance of the premiums; that the defendant issued a master policy to the employer, for which it charged the employer a single premium annually; and that there were delivered to the employer individual certificates ‘made out to each’ employee. Wing's certificate was delivered to him. The certificate was headed, ‘John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company of Boston, Mass.’ It stated that Wing was insured subject to the terms and conditions of the group policy issued to the employer, and it recited in detail the nature of the coverage and the rights of Wing under the certificate. In relation to disability payments it contained a proviso or condition that written notice of disability be ‘received by the Company’ within a specified time. Except for receiving this certificate, Wing ‘had no business dealings with the defendant.’ The employer attended to all details in respect to the payment of premiums, the giving of monthly reports to the defendant concerning the number of insured employees, and the adjustment of premiums. While the policy was in force, Wing had a heart attack and was confined to bed, but continued to receive his wages. When he returned to work for a time (against his physician's orders) the employer asked him for a doctor's certificate. He furnished the employer such a certificate to the effect that he had coronary thrombosis and varicose ulcers. Aside from the doctor's certificate furnished to the employer there was no evidence of the written notice to ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kirkpatrick v. Boston Mut. Life Ins. Co.
...certificate "which took the place of the ordinary insurance policy" to determine contract terms. Wing v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 314 Mass. 269, 271, 49 N.E.2d 905 (1943).5 The judge also ruled that the plaintiff had not relied upon the erroneous effective date in the certificate, a......
-
Prudential Insurance Company of America v. Clauson, 5872.
...the insurance is the agent of the person insured under the policy." Ingalls was not Clauson's agent. Wing v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co., 1943, 314 Mass. 269, 49 N.E.2d 905, is distinguishable. At the same time it is immaterial whether Ingalls was Chrysler's agent or the defendant's, ......
- Wing v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co.