New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-06-29
A New Issue In the Southern Lie Policy
Question.

&uootAOos
In the numerous suits that have hereto
fore been brought to recover on Southern
lite policies, the effort has been to obtain .
Judgment for the amount of the claim after
the death of the insured. The fundamental
difficulty in allowing all such claims has Of
course been the optional power of the in.
sured. Were the contract of suoh q nature
that payment Of premium like payment Of
note was compulsory, no very serious Ob-
lection to the settlement Of these claims
might arise. But when . policy holder,
after four or five years intermission. may
elect to discontinue or demand the sum In
sured, according to his interest, . pslpable
injustice is done. In the Gaze OF Bird vs..
Pennsylvania Mutual Lite. United States
Circuit Court, however Is Insurance Law
Journal. June), the matter Is presented in q
now aspect.
Bird, the insured, is still alive. and comes
before Q court Of equity demanding permits
sion to pay his back premiums with interest,
in q mutual company, and have his policy
rsinstated. It will be observed that his ap-
plicAtion stands on very different footing
from that of the others. The issue has not
determined: it is uncertain perhaps IS ever
whether or not it will advantage tho com.
pany to readmit him. He seeks no legal set
clement of monsyed claim, but simply an
equitable reinstatement. in his old relations.
Does the failure Of the condition precedent.
viz, prompt payment, prohibit this! The
court admitted that. a. matter of law,
it did, and further left it an open question
whether equity more than law could
relieve, had the issue arisen upon his
death; but in disposing OF the existing
facts . fresh line of argument was struck
out based almost entirely upon English pre-
cedents. Equity, according to the judge in
this instance, may relieve from forfeiture
even through q condition precedent where
it has resulted through NJ fault OF the in
sured but from unavoidable necessity, and
it is possible to put the parties in the same
position that they occupied before the
breach, and properly estimate the compsn-
sstion. The English and Irish land cases
were cited in point. The leasehold tenant
who has been prevented from paying the
trivial fine, which is a condition TO tne con.
tinuance of his lease, may nevertheless COM
pei its acceptance. So, argued the court in
this case, the three requisites, the interpo-
sition Of equity, were present. War, the
preventative, was unavoidable; the cOmpen.
sacion could be distinctly fixed upon the
terms of the contract, being the premiums
with legal interest; and the parties with .
reinstatement of the policy would stsnd as
before. Therefore the applicant was entitled
to his relief.
we UHVo OUt sing CGlSlCism 10 mak0
upon the conclusion reached. Legally
sound and in accord with admitted prin-
ciples Of equity in all respects save one,
that one defect might he fatal to it's proper
application. If the insured were in his Or
binary health it would % possible to rein
state the parties, but if that health had
meanwhile been impaired, no less than if
he had died, would reinstatement be grant
| ing to him in modified degree the option
OF the loss claimant. No court Of equity in
such case could place the parties where
looked. and by that oversight, in our jud2-
msot, the whole strength Of the argument,
otherwise sound and admirable, was d.
stroyed. Granted q life with tas same in
surance value, except a. to age. and there
can be no equitable objection against rein
statement, but such DEGREES should he linn
tied to sound lives.-Iasurance Monitor.