The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1907-11-05
Jury Decided No Fraud
in Dr.. Jones' Policy


@AA&A = AH&a 4a#t&5A - @EFH- AHf
- 9 brought n Dr ~ = Jouss ~
High Point against the PROS lest i-&tc
Insurance Ceu4anH. was caata4ei lu
TIE Superior court yesterday SITTER
noon when tire Jup pru at ~ a. iu
verdict findings that there was no
tfaud prartt~vd upon Ur Jones tn 80
surins him AZ p poles holder 70 ttv
company and that the agent ne .atI
him he policy had SO authority from
p g company 20 warp a. terms the
written contract
Although there were He, eutecn IN
sues subtultiei 10 the Jarn GOVERNS
two Mere those - Rhlch hung us'
fate OF the litigation sH Tar AS h lay
with the jury - dcCtN 81 TIL res
suit. Of course. va~ "a tIts1ry Tor the
insurance company
On the question y law lnHoil "a ia
the construction of the policy itself.
the jury was not permitted u pass
Judge Long taking this matter under
consideration aud rcsertiug his de-
ctsion.
In this matter IL Is conteude1 that
the policy shouit he construed ~ as
10 contemplate term policy up 10 tho
age OF sixty-nve years, when the iu-
sured was afterwards - PhN an hat
IL called the level premium plan
The insurance company denies this.
CphttEuIng tDat hN the terms 8f inc
policy II was contemplated that Il re-
main a term policy throughout the
life Of the insured. a character Of
insurance whereby "A certain umbc
are insured in one class. n" premium
increasing in the case of the survivors
as death makes the number Uf surNi-
vors smaller and increases the claims
that must be paid.
The construction Of the policy was.
however. incidental To the case which
hung upon the question OF fraud on
the part of the agent who secured
the policy for the company and whcth-
er, In case he made false representa-
tons. the plaintiff could reiy on them
when the policy was a written con-
tract and he a man OF Intelligence
Although the defendant did not sue
coed in keeping this question from the
jury for determination. ii MAS found
with IL by the verdict,
The case has been hotly contested
by a numbe OF lawyers OF great
ability and prominence and has been
watched by insurance men with the
greatest interest. since IL raises IA very
important question as to the liability
OF companies and their dealings with
their agents.
| After having answered the first Is
sue, as to fraud with the defendant
company. the jury. In it's answer 10
two other issues. found with the con-
tentions OF the defendants:
1st BY finding that If the agent
who secured DR.. Jones policy was not
authorized to make n contract. DIR.
Jones had no knowledge Of the fact
end. Thai the plaintiff was deferred
from bringing suit earlier by represeh-
tations made to him by the agent.
In tn sse findings there is some trou-
BILE for the defendant company. not
withstanding the fact that the jury
found there was no fraud, in thet IL
found that DR.. Jones acted on repre-
sensations made to him and that he
had no notice that the agent making
such representations had no authority
to make a contract
The attorneys for the plaintiff. after
the verdict was rendered, expressed
themselves as being satisfied with the
verdict on the whole and say that they
will move for judgment for the plain
tiff.
If Judge Long should conetrue the
policy as contended by the plaintiff IL
should be construed, the question be-
fore the Supreme court VIII be OF the
matter Of fraud complicated by the
verdict of the jury; IL he hnds with
the defendant. the plaintiff viii have
two grounds for their argument In the
Supreme court, one the question OF
fraud, and the other the matter or
la " involved in the construction OF the
policy.
The policy in issue was taken 10y
Dr.. Jones in 1887 and he has already
paid in premiums on II over ten thous-
and dollars with five thousand in in
terest. Last years premium had
grown to be over one thousand dol
lars.
The case was well AMI fully argued.
the speeches yesterday being made by
Ex-Governor G. b. Aycock. for the de-
PENDANT and ex-Chief Justice Jas. +.
Shepherd. for the plaintiff. other ar
guments delivered on friday were
made by Messrs. S B. Shepherd, Mr..
j. y Holding, Mr.. J.. II Pou. and
Colonel i. NJ. Argo.