Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-06-15
COURT DECISIONS.
Notes of Cases Recently Decided,
Which are Of Interest to
Our People.
DIGESTED BY w. B. MARTIN.
(ExcluSively for virginian- Pilot.)
KENDR1cK v. NJ. B. LIFE ms. co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina,
April 4, 1889
IN THE ABSENCE OF FRAUD AN
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN A POLL
CY OF INSURANCE THAT THE
PREMIUM HAS BEEN PAID CAN
NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY PA
ROL EVIDENCE.
A POLICY IS PRESUMED TO HAVE
BEEN DELIVERED AT IT'S DATE,
IF IN POSSESSION OF INSURED.
A POLICY SUSCEPTIBLE OF TWO
CONSTRUCTIONS IT IS con-
STRUED FAVORABLY TO INSUR-
ED. AND AS CONSTRUED BY
COMPANIES AGENT.
INSURED is NOT BOUND BY CON-
PANY'S INSTRUCTIONS TO IT'S
AGENT NOT KNOWN TO HIM.
THE TIME OF THE MAILING OF A
CHECK BY-TIE AGENT, 10 TFffffff3 HE
COMPANY IN PAYMENT OF PRE-
MUM WAS THE TIME OF PAY
MENT. TIE CHECK BEING AT
TERWARDS PAID.
John Il. Kendrick applied for insur-
Ihny for The benefit of his wife, the
Iiaintiff, and on the 18th of July the
defendant issued its policy i'm accord
ahce with the terms Of the applica ton.
which was delivered by It's agent to him
rev days thereafter. He was after
wards taken i'll with typhoid fever, and
died on the 18th of September. 1897.
The policy recited the payment of the
premium, though in fact it was not
PAID until few hours before and in
TACT on the same day on which the in
slTed died; the payment being then
made for him by 4 friend, and accented
by the local agent with full knowledge
or Hendricks critical condition. This
agent had heretofore INDUCED the nav
ment. stating that 1t would be SUFFICIENT
tne payment was made during Ken
bricks life. The policy contained n
provision: This policy does not take
effect until the first premium shall have
been actually paid during the lifetime
or the assured" There was in the in
structions or the company, in the hands
OF us agents, Il further provision that
when premium is paid more than
thirty, and within sixty days after due.
q certificate of good health, signed by
the applicant, will be required" 1t was
not shown that John F. Kendrick had
notice of this instruction. There was n
Judgment for plaintiff and defendant
appealed.
The court says:
These. In substance, were the facts:
Inc plaintiff, to whom the policy was
payable, was in possession of tho mol
Icy. and, the death of the insured being
admitted, this made out a prima. facie
case In the absence OF evidence. the
pollcy Is presumed to have been de-
livercd ut the time it bears date. The
authorities are numerous and quite I'M
form that the Acknowledgement in tho
Poiicy or the receipt OF the premium
estopS the company to contest tho val
loity or the policy on the ground of
non-payment of the premium. In so
lar as II Is mere rcceiptef- money Ii
Is only prima facie like other receiDts
hlu VIII not prevent an action TO re-
cover the money If not in truth maid.
but. In so far as it Is n part Of tho CON,
tract or insurance. it cannot be contra
olcted by parol to invalidate the con-
tract in the absence of fraud in pro-
curing the delivery of the policy. 1t is
conceded that the proviso in the policv
mat Ii shall not be effective unless the
hrst premium shall have been actually
paid during the lifetime of the insur
ed removed the estoppel arising from
the Acknowledgment Of the recejnt of
the money, the condition was complied
with by the actual payment of The
money in the lifetime of the insured.
which related back to the date of tha
policy. 1t would be contrary 10 every
rule of construction to restrict the oh
legation of a promisor beyond the Main
meaning OF his words. On the con-
trary, the uniform rule of Construction
of insurance policies is that, IL reason
ably susceptible OF two constructions
that one will be adopted which is more
favorable to the insured at Is n rule
of law, as we'll as of ethics, that where
the language OF promisor may be un
derstood in more senses than one IL ia
to be interpreted in the sense in which
he had reason TO suppose it was un-
derstood by the promisee." 1t is also
a familiar rule of law that If il be leS;
In doubt, in view of the general tenor
OF the instrument and the relations of
the contracting parties, whether given
words were used in an enlarged or n
restricted sense. other things being
equal, that construction should be
adopted which is most beneficial to the
promisee.
Besides. the agent of the company
put the same construction upon the
policy, and said that it would be suf-
1icient IL the payment was made dur
ing lifetime" and If this had misled the
Insured, 1t would have been fraud for
the company to avail itself of n for
feiture thus procured. The agent di-
rected the check TO be mailed" and
the time of the mailing was the time of
payment the check being honored on
presentation.) Every phrase of the de-
PENDANTS contention could be and was
presented without prejudice. under the