Wommack v. Shenandoah Life Ins. Co.

Decision Date24 July 1979
Docket NumberCIV78-4018.
Citation473 F. Supp. 757
PartiesDavid A. WOMMACK, Plaintiff, v. SHENANDOAH LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of South Dakota

Richard L. Johnson and William F. Clayton, Sioux Falls, S. D., for plaintiff.

Robert C. Heege, of Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith, Sioux Falls, S. D., for defendant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

NICHOL, Chief Judge.

In this court trial plaintiff Wommack, a citizen of South Dakota, is suing Shenandoah Life Insurance Co., a Virginia corporation, under the double indemnity Accidental Death and Dismemberment provision of his wife's group life insurance policy. This policy provision promises to pay the plaintiff $17,500 if death should occur from "bodily injuries solely through violent, external and accidental means."

Mrs. Wommack died on August 10, 1977. On this evening, Mrs. Wommack and her husband, the plaintiff in this action, had been drinking beer and conversing with a neighbor. Mrs. Wommack had also made sandwiches of prepared meat. Mrs. Wommack with a sandwich in her hand, excused herself to go upstairs. The plaintiff after escorting the neighbor to the door was called upstairs by one of the Wommack children. There he found his wife face down and unconscious on the hallway floor. The plaintiff removed some material from his wife's mouth and began resuscitation efforts. Neither the plaintiff nor the paramedics who arrived could revive the plaintiff's wife and she was pronounced dead at the hospital. The evidence indicates that she died from asphyxiation when material described as pink-tan, friable debris filled her left main bronchus.

The main issue presented to the court is whether the deceased died from external means within the terms of the policy. The court agrees with the majority of reasoned authority that the applicability of the term external to describe the means by which Mrs. Wommack died is dependent upon whether the aspirated material causing her asphyxiation had been swallowed and regurgitated from the stomach or not swallowed at all. If the substance was within the stomach and on its way out it is internal; if the substance was choked upon as it was being ingested it is external. McCallum v. Mutual Life Insurance Co., 175 F.Supp. 3 (E.D.Va.1959), aff'd per curiam 274 F.2d 431 (4th Cir. 1960); Jones v. Liberty National Life Insurance Co., Ala., 357 So.2d 976 (1978); Stowmatt v. Volunteer State Life Insurance Co., Fla.App., 176 So.2d 563 (1965); Spott v. Equitable Life Insurance Co., 209 Cal.App.2d 229, 95 Cal. Rptr. 782, 98 A.L.R.2d 315 (1962); Radcliffe v. National Life and Accident Insurance Co., Tex.Civ.App., 298 S.W.2d 213 (1957); 98 A.L.R.2d 318. Cf: Commercial Insurance Co. v. Orr, 379 F.2d 865 (8th Cir. 1967). (This case involved choking on vomitus under a policy which provided benefits if death was from accidental bodily injury and indicated a result favorable to defendant if the policy had required death due to external, violent, and accidental means.)

The Shenandoah Life Insurance Company defended on the theory that the plaintiff could not carry the burden of proving that death was due to external means under the policy. The burden is on the plaintiff to show by a preponderance of the evidence that Mrs. Wommack's death was caused by external, violent, and accidental means before he recovers the double indemnity benefits. Lohman v. General American Life Insurance Co., 478 F.2d 719 (8th Cir. 1973), cert. denied 414 U.S. 857, 94 S.Ct. 162, 38 L.Ed.2d 107; Svenson v. Mutual Life Insurance Co., 87 F.2d 441 (8th Cir. 1937). The rule of construction that favors the insured has no application to the plaintiff's burden of proof where the language is clear and unambiguous as it is in this case. D & P...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Spaid v. Cal-Western States Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 23, 1982
    ...liquid food...." (Spott v. Equitable Life Ins. Co., supra, 209 Cal.App.2d 229, 230-232, 25 Cal.Rptr. 782; accord: Wommack v. Shenandoah Life Ins. Co. (S.D.1979) 473 F.Supp. 757; McCallum v. Mutual Life Ins. Company of New York (E.D.Va.1959) 175 F.Supp. 3, aff'd. per curiam 274 F.2d 431 (4th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT