Case ID: ga-app_32/html/0346-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Broyles, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

15400.
    RILEY v. AMERICAN NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.
    The action being upon an insurance policy which provided that it did not cover any loss from disease “not common to both sexes,” and the only issue to be determined being whether a fibroid tumor' was a disease covered by the policy, and there being undisputed evidence that men can not have fibroid tumors, and that only women can be so afflicted, the court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant.
    Decided May 14, 1924.
    Appeal; from Chatham superior court — Judge Meldrim. January 11, 1924.
    
      O. E. Johnson, O. E. Alexander, for plaintiff.
    
      Frederick A. Tuten, for defendant.
   Broyles, C. J.

This was a suit upon a health and accident insurance policy. Upon the trial it was agreed in open court by both parties that the only question in issue and to be determined by the court and jury was whether or not a fibroid tumor was a disease or disability covered by the policy. The policy of insurance provided that it did not cover any loss resulting from any disease “not common to both sexes;” and the undisputed evidence was that men.cannot have fibroid tumors — that only women can be so afflicted. It follows that the court properly directed a verdict in favor of the defendant.

The case of Schuler v. American Benefit Association, 132 Mo. App. 123, cited by counsel for the plaintiff in error, is distinguished by its particular facts from this case.

Judgment affirmed,.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.