Case ID: ny_57/html/0638-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gray, C.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gertrude Koelges, Respondent, v. The Guardian Life Insurance Company, Appellant.
    (Argued September 30, 1873;
    decided January term, 1874.)
    In an action against an insurance company upon a policy of insurance plaintiff proved the issuing of a pamphlet by defendant, but it was not. received in evidence. In summing up plaintiff’s counsel was permitted, under objection, to read from and state its contents to the jury, the court stating that he might do so by way of summing up. -Held, error.
    This was an action upon a policy of life insurance issued by defendant. The policy contained a clause that in case premiums were not paid on or- before the time specified the policy should be forfeited. The defence was that, under this clause, the policy had been forfeited.
    Upon the trial of the action plaintiff proved that a certain pamphlet was issued by defendant. It was not received in evidence. In the summing up of the cause plaintiff’s counsel began to read extracts from this pamphlet. This was objected to by defendant’s counsel upon the ground that the pamphlet was not in evidence. The court held that the counsel might read from the pamphlet by way of summing up; to which decision defendant’s counsel excepted. The plaintiff’s counsel then read certain extracts and stated that the pamphlet contained the words “ non-forfeitable policies ” more than forty times. Held, that the ruling of the court was error which may have prejudiced defendant.
    
      Livingston K. Miller for the appellant.
    
      Samuel Norris for the respondent.
   Gray, C.,

reads for reversal.

All concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted.