« ПредишнаНапред »
nant were well and truly complied with The question of “reasonable time" was and performed,” and not having proved for the jury : such compliance in every particular, she Coursin v. Penna. Ios. Co., 10 Wright 323. is not entitled to recover.
Chandler v. Commerce Ins. Co., 7 Norris 223.
Franklin Ins. Co. v. Updegrafi, 7 Wright 350. Ans. This point is refused.
May 21, 1883. PER CURIAM The 5. Upon all the evidence offered in the plaintiff in error was duly notified to procase the verdict of the jury must be in fa- duce the application. Failing to do so, vor of the defendant.
there was no error in admitting the policy Ans This point is refused.
in evidence. The conduct of the presi
dent of the Association, as well as his disH. L. Fisher, N. M. Wanner and W.
tinct and express admission and declaraS. Campbell for plaintiff in error.
tion in writing, were a waiver of the The admission of the policy, without proofs otherwise necessary. As there the application, was error:
was really no evidence establishing a deLycoming Ins. Co. v. Sailer, 17 Smith 106.
fence, the jury were correctly instructed Plaintiff should have proved the exis- to find for the plaintiff below unless they tence of the application :
discredited his witnesses. Wharton on Evidence, Section 141.
Lebanon County. therefore not binding on the defendant
Bettinger v. United Brethren Mutual company :
Mutual Insurance--Assignment of Pol
icy--Insurable Interest. late: Com. Ins. Co. v. Sennett, s Wright 161.
H., the beneficiary in a mutual policy, assigned the
same to third persons, who had no insurable interest.Klein v. Franklin Ins. Co., I Harris 247.
These assignees paid all assessments, and at the death of Trask v, State Insurance Co., 5 Casey 198.
the insured, claimed the amount of the policy from the Edward v. Lycoming Mut. Ins. Co., 25 Smith 378.
Association. Before payment, H. notified the Association
that he claimed the amount of the insurance as heir-atBeatly v. Same, 16 Smith 9.
law of the insured, and contested the assignment on the
ground of the assignees having no insurable interest, and The President had no authority to waive the entire transaction being a speculation, and brought
suit against the Association. HELD, That H. was estopdeath-proofs :
ped from setting up such a claim, he having entered into
the arrangement of his own accord, and executed an Hackney v. Insurance Co., 4 Barr 187.
assignment under seal to that effect. Mitchell v. Insurance Co., I Smith 402. Smith v. Insurance Co., 12 Harris, 325.
April 4, 1883. JOHN B. MCPHERSON, Shaefer v. Mutual Ins. 8 Norris 301.
A. L. J. This case was tried before the Insurance Co. v. Perrine, 7 W. & S. 348.
Court without a Jury under the provision E. W. Spangler and W. C. Chapman of the Act of 1874. From the evidence for defendants in error.
before us we find the following facts : The plaintiff could not offer the appli
1. On October 20, 1875, two certificates cation in evidence, because the defendant of membership or policies of insurance refused to furnish it.
were taken out by Catharine Hettinger, in The death proofs had been waived by favor of the plaintiff Joseph Hettinger, her
the defendant Society on her own life in the actions of the President, and the com- husband, his heirs or assigns ; one certifipany were bound by his declarations :
cate or policy, No. 320 class 2, Division Cass v. Railway Company, 30 P. F. Smith 36. Smith v. Farmers and Mechanics Ins. Co. 8 Norris 287
C. for $3000 and one, No. 621 class 1, DiEilenberger v. Protective Mutual Ins. Co., 8 Norris 464 vision B, for $2000. These policies or 2. On December 23, 1865, Joseph Het- cies from the defendant, and upon its retinger sold his interest in these policies to fusal to pay brought this suit. A. B. Baum and S. B. Lemberger, assign
Lycoming Co. Mutual Ins Co. v. Schollenberger, 8 Wright 259
certificates are contracts of life insurance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW. ing No. 320 directly to them and No. 621
Upon these facts the plaintiff claims to in blank with an agreement that the blank
recover from the society the full amount might be filled up with the names of such
of the policies referred to with interest, on person as would purchase the policy from Baum and Lemberger. The latter policy and that the defendant paid the money
the ground that his assignments were void, No. 621, was afterwards purchased by
to the assignees after notice of his claim. Daniel R. Speck and John H. Speck. and
It is evident that the plaintiff cannot be their names inserted in the blank. On July 14, 1877, Baum assigned his interest regarded with favor in a court of justice. in policy No. 320, to Ephriam Borgner. He was a party to a speculation on the The defendant had notice of these assign- life of his wife, received money for his ments and approved the same on January share in the transaction, permitted with4, 1876, February 8, 1876 and July 16, 1877
out objection the assignees to assume his
obligations to the Society and to pay more respectively.
than $600, in consequence thereof, and at3. The plaintiff received from Baum and Lemberger $10, as consideration for his tempted to repudiate his contract only
when there was no more money to pay, assignment of these policies. The assign- and there seemed to be a prospect of ments were not procured by fraud, but the
money to get. Or to state the case. in assignees had no insurable interest in the life of Catharfne Hettinger and the assign- consideration transferred the legal title to
other words. having willingly, and for a ments were made for speculative purposes. these policies and clothed the assignees
4. The assignees paid to the Society the with at least an apparent right to their subsequent assessments and dues upon proceeds, by virtue of which right and these policies as follows: on No. 320, the title they obtained from the Society the sum of $294.00 and on No. 621 the sum of
money it had agreed to pay, he now asks $331.00.
a court to declare his contract void not 5. On June 19, 1887, Catharine Hettin- only as against the assignees but against ger
died. Proof of death was made by the the Society as well, and to say, that the assignees and approved by the Society on latter was not justified in relying upon his July 9, 1878. On July 19th, 1878, Joseph contract under seal because he afterwards Hettinger by his attorney notified the gave notice that he did not intend to stand Society that all insurance on the life of by it. To succeed in such a claim, the Catharine Hettinger was claimed by him- plaintiff must call to his aid some rule of self and by her heirs and legal representa public policy or some rigid rule of law. tives, and that it should not pay to any
We have not been referred to any rule one until the right thereto had been legally of law which compels us to declare the asdetermined.
signments void, and we are of opinion that 6. On October 9, 1878, the Society paid the plaintiff cannot in this suit ask us to to Lemberger and Borgner on policy No. apply the rule of public policy which for 320, the sum of $3000, less $90 for certain bids wagering insurance on human life. deductions, a total of $2910 and on the It would not be proper to say, what the same date to Daniel and John Speck on result of applying that rule would be if policy No. 621, the sum of $2000, less $75 the plaintiff had proceeded against the asfor certain deductions, a total of 1925.
signees, and we do not intimate any opin7. Subsequently in June, 1881, the ion on the questions which might then plaintiff demanded payment of these poli- arise : but it seems clear to us that the
plaintiff is estopped from invoking the aid fore he cannot recover from the Society in of the rule in this suit against the Society. the face of his assignment. We have The case is analagous to that class, in found the facts as stated in the last clause which the question arises, which of two No. 3, in order that the plaintiff may have innocent persons must suffer, and the the case fairly reviewed, and not because answer there is plain that, as between such we
we think they are needed to determine persons, the loss must fall upon him whose this issue. act enabled the injury to be done : Gar- The points of plaintiff and defendant are rard v.Haddan, 17 Sm.85. The difference substantially answered by what has been is against the plaintiff for here he did not said above and we need not repeat our innocently cause the injury of which he conclusions in detail. The plaintiff's obcomplains, but with full knowledge of the jections to the admission of the assignfact, which he now urges as making his ments in evidence are overruled. assignments void, viz: the assignees' want
We direct judgment to be entered for of insurable interest, nevertheless trans- defendant if no exceptions are filed as ferred the policies to them and thereby provided by law. shared in causing the Society to pay them
Plaintiff excepts and bill sealed: ! the money
In effect he sent them to the defendant with his authority under seal to take his place, pay his dues and receive
Abstracts of Becent Decisions. the proceeds of the policies; and surely, since the genuineness of the authority is (Cases not otherwise designated are Sunot denied, he cannot be allowed to com
preme Court cases.), plain because the Society has exactly carried out its provisions.
Agency-Fraud --Confidential relation
between principal and agent.-A. without If these principles are sound, the plain- | authority from B, obtained bids for the tiffs notice of July 19, 1887, did not better erection of a house on B's land, the bids his position. The assignments were gen- including five per cent commission to A. uine, and had not been obtained by fraud, Subsequently B authorized A to sign a and his notice was a mere declaration that contract for the erection of the house and he intended to repudiate them, which the to supervise its construction, agreeing to Society if it saw proper might disregard. give him five per cent. commission for his Other questions might arise, if the assign- services. In an action by A to recover ments had been spurious and notice of that his commission from B, Held, that it was fact had been given before payment.
for the jury to say whether the two conUpon the whole case, therefore, we tracts were independent or not, and if find for the defendant.
they believe them to have been indepenTo avoid misunderstanding, we desire dent, fair compensation for the service to say that nothing herein contained is to
rendered may be recovered. --Galloway v. . be construed as deciding, or intimating an
Walker. (Delaware C. P.) i Delaware
County Reports, 453 opinion upon any questions which may arise between the assignor and assignee of Executors--Rents--Creditors.-Execwager policies, or between the assignee of utors having been given authority in a will such a policy and the company; or as sus- to rent, and if necessary, sell real estate of taining insurance of such a character. testator and appropriate proceeds to satisThese matters are left. untouched; the faction of debts, rented the real estate for point we decide is, that the plaintiff is es- three years, and then relinquished possestopped from raising the question of insur-sion under agreement of partition between able interest in this case, and that there residuary beneficiaries; Held, that as be
tween them and such beneficiaries, they (Schuylkill C. P.) 40 Legal Intellingenmust account for rents due and uncollected cer 221. on the transfer of possession of such real Will--Construction of Intention of estate.—McKee's Estate, (Allegheny 0. testator.-A will should so be construed C.) 13 Pittsburgh Legal Journal, 392. that the whole may, if possible, stand, and
Criminal Law---Indictment--Where a where two or more parts of a will are, defendant was charged in an indictment with reference to the same subject matwith having falsely pretended that a cer- ter, so totally repungent to each other that tain draft was a good and valuable draft, both cannot stand the latter must prevail. and that he had funds in the National | A testator is presumed to have an addiBank of Wooster, Ohio, to pay it, but the tional purpose for each additional expresevidence only proved him to have said sion, and to intend such a meaning as will that there was money in the hands of de- give most effect to the context.—David fendant's partner, who lived in Wooster, Flaud et al. v. Martin's Executors. (LanOhio, to pay the draft, and that it was a caster C. P.) 14 Lancaster Bar 207. good draft. HELD, that the variance be
Will—Construction of.-Land was detween the indictment and the proof was vised to four brothers, charged with a fatal, and after conviction upon the charge legacy, the interest thereof payable to E. the defendant may have a new trial.
for life, and the principal at her death to Commonwealth v. Garver, (Phil'a S. C.) her issue, or should she die without issue, 40 Legal Intellingencer 210.
the same to “be and remain the property" Guardian-Rate of Interest-Where a of the four brothers. Held, that the deguardian uses trust funds in his busi- vise of the land did not include the prinness, he is liable for interest thereon at ciple of the legacy; that the latter vested the rate of 6 per cent. Oliver's Estate, in the four sons at the death of the testa(Allegheny 0. C.) 13 Pittsburgh Legal tor; and that the charge of the legacy did Journal 385.
not merge in the fee of the real estate.Negligence--Duty of Employer.--An Penock v. Eagles. 2 Chester County Reemployer in a dangerous business, is only ports 34. required to furnish for his employees the
Will--Construction of:--Testator deordinary and usual means of escape in vised to his son a store on Water street. accident.-Marsden v. Haigh, (Delaware In another and subsequent item he devised C. P.) 1 Weekly Reporter 451.
the rest of his estate to his children and Practice. After a long lapse of time their issue, on the final settlement and disan attorney will not be allowed to with tribution of his estate. In another and draw his acceptance of service of writ, subsequent item he devised unto his exand appearance and plea, unless it be ecutors "all my estate, real, personal and satisfactorily shown that the plaintiff mixed, whatsoever and wheresoever, in would be in as good position as when the trust for the purpose herein specified, and writ was issued.-Heller v. Walker et al. subject to the limitations and reservations (Luzurne C. P.) 12 Luzurne Legal Reg. in items before mentioned.” Held, that )
HELD ister 138.
as by different parts of the will testator's Surety-Liability of—The sureties on intention was not to have a final distributhe bond of the cashier of an unincorpor- tion and settlement of his estate until his ated association are not liable when this youngest son reached the age of twentyassociation becomes a chartered company five, that the rent of the Water street store with other privileges and limitations than was payable to the executors and not to those to be exercised by the private asso- the son prior to that time.-Conrow's ciation.-Bensinger et al. v. Wren et al. | Appeal. 40 Legal Intellingencer 221.
YORK LEGAL RECORD. self for college at the York County Acad
emy, and entered the freshman class at the THURSDAY, MAY 17, 1883.
Pennsylvania College at Gettysburg, Pa., William Hay, Esq.
when he graduated in 1856. He then
read law with the firm of Evans & Mayer, HAY-Died, on Sunday morning, May 13,
and immediately after his admission to the at his residence, No. 122 West Market
bar, in 1858 was invited by the late Hon. street, William Hay, Esq., aged 47
Thomas E. Cochran, to become his law years, 8 months and 28 days.
partner, which he accepted. This partThe following extracts are made from
nership continued until the death of Mr. the YORK DAILY :
Cochran about one year ago. The announcement of the death of Wil
On account of a large legal practice Mr. liam Hay has cast a dark shadow over our
Hay devoted very little time to politics.entire community. Until quite recently
Shortly after his admission to the bar he his early taking off was even beyond the
was nominated on the Republican ticket possibility of contemplation. Prior to a
as District Attorney, and notwithstanding recent attack of pneumonia, he was ap
a very large Democratic majority in the parently in the enjoyment of such health
county, he came very near being elected. and spirits as would have insured to the
During the Tilden and Hayes presidential eye of an ordinary observer, a sound and
campaign, Mr. Hay was appointed a vigorous constitution for many years to
state elector. He was a director of the come. Mr. Hay was yet a comparatively
York National Bank and the York Water young man, and it is with inexpressible
Company and also their counsel. Several sadness that we chronicle the untimely
years ago he received the appointment of death of one who while yet in the zenith
resident counsel of the Pennsylvania Railand fulness of nianhood has fallen at
road Company, a very responsible and midday before the shadows of the eve
lucrative position, which he held until the ning of life had commenced to gather
time of his death. He was also the counaround him.
sel for many of our large manufacturing He was esteemed by all who knew him,
establishments. because of the purity of his life and the
In social walks, and in his house and conscientious discharge of his duties of
family surroundings he was a model. good citizenship, and who added to his
Gentle and courteous to all who approachvirtues all that belongs to the character of
ed him, it was a pleasure and happiness an upright and able lawyer. There was
to meet him. no tricky smartness about him, or desire
His kindly voice and cheerful nature to entrap an adversary by deceit and
are gone from us forever ; but we cannot stealth. He relied upon the truth and merits of his case, and was earnest in mak
forget his many exalted virtues, his true ing that plain to the court. He was labori
and generous manhood, his faithful per
formance of the duties of his life, and, ous and diligent in the preparation of his
above all, his consistent Christian example. cases, and he did not spare himself in faithful work for his large and respectable clientage. He and his late partner, Mr. A large attendance of the bar was had Cochran, were generally engaged in the at the time and place mentioned in the trial of the most prominent cases, and now following call for a meeting issued by the both are gone.
senior member of the bar, to wit: "The Mr. Hay early in life showed a strong Judges of the court and members of the predilection for the law. With the aim bar are requested to assemble at the grand of becoming a lawyer, he prepared him- jury room this (Monday) afternoon, at