Case ID: ill-app_205/html/0334-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Holdom", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Marie Mahalek, Appellee, v. Merchants Reserve Life Insurance Company, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 22,788.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Insurance, § 436
      
      —what is sufficient notice of insured’s death obviating necessity of formal proofs. Where notice of an insured’s death was given to the president of the insurer company who replied “all right, they would go and see him,” held that this afforded the insurer all opportunity necessary for it to verify the death and ascertain the cause thereof, notwithstanding no formal proofs of death contemplated by the policy were made.
    2. Insurance, § 456*—when formal proofs of death are waived. Where the insurer in a life insurance policy refused to pay upon the ground that the insured’s answers to questions touching his health in his application for the policy were false, held that formal proofs of death contemplated by the policy were waived.
    3. Insurance, § "452*—when notice of loss is waived. Where the defense to an action to recover on a life insurance policy is placed on other grounds than the death of the insured, notice of loss is waived.
    
      Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 16, 1917.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Marie Mahalek, plaintiff, against the Merchants Reserve Life Insurance Company, defendant, to recover on a life insurance policy. From a judgment for plaintiff for $1,161.39, defendant appeals.
    Gideon S. Thompson, for appellant.
    Hart E. Baker, for appellee.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI So XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Insurance, § 659*—when evidence is sufficient to show truth of statements in application. Evidence in an action on a life insurance policy, held to warrant finding that the insured's statements in his application for life insurance as to his health were true and not false.

5. Insurance, § 663 —what is not evidence of Knowledge of falsity of statements by insured in application. A coroner’s finding on autopsy that an insured’s death was due to organic heart disease, held not to he evidence tending to prove that the insured consciously departed from .the truth when he represented in his application for life insurance that he did not suffer from heart disease1, in an action to recover on a life insurance policy.