Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1919-07-29
INSURANCE CASE IS
DECIDED BY court

A list Of scvsn opinions was handed
down this morning from the supreme
court. One Of these is Of special inter
est as dealing with the relations Of an
insurance company to its sgeats. This
is the ease Of A. Il. Hinksoa IS. Kansas
City life Insurance company, appealed
from Lane county, Hon. +. F. sipworth,
adge. The opinion is by Justice Johns
The evidence shows that the plaintiff
teok ont I different policies with the
insurance company, dealing with its
general agent, L. Y. Rawlings The
Transactions covered a period OF years,
and in each ease the plaintiff made one
or two payments on the pfomium and
then gave the agent his note to cover
subsequent payments, which notes were
in several instances granted an cxten.
sion. Each one Of the four policies were
cancelled one after the other on the
ground Of nonpayment Of premium.
The testimony showed, however, that
Rawlings, as the authorized agent Of the
company, voluntarily waived certain
stipulations and restrictions of the pol
'rv iah wore the basis of eeneella-
tion. The plaintiff shows that he Of
fercd to surreAder his policy in demand
ing the return Of his money, but was re-
fused any consideration on the ground
Of forfeiture for nOnpayment. The case
was taken into circuit court and jury
gave Judgment to the plaintiff in the
sums of about $500. The defendant
company appealed alleging in their
brief AZ different points of error in the
lower court. The central point in their
appeal was that Rawlings acted with
out authority in waving stipulations, N
payment, and especially in granting ex-
tensions.
Justice Johns, analyzinz the ease
notes peculiar situation, in that while
the defendant company had upon It's
books the record Of the transactions
with Rawlings in issuing two Of the
policies. it had no direct eommunica
tions whatever with the plaintiff and il
was not until nearly five years after the
first policy was issued that they sent
to the plaintiff circular letter inform
ing him that they had discontinued the
payment of premiums through the Port
land office, The justice points to tht
fact that the company had knowledge
Of part Of the dealings of Rawlings
with Hinkson, and holds that if these
actions were ratified they were bound
to abide by all the dealings. They
could not accept what was to their ad
vantage and reject what was not. Or
the ground that the plaintiff dealt Will
the general agent in good faith ,anC
that the company had opportunity t
know Of the actions Of their agent il
they actually did not, Justice Johni
holds that the Judgment of the lowe'
court should be affirmed
Other opinions handed own today
were as follows;
j. G.. Houck vs. Hilla A. c. Houck
ct al, appellautsi appeal from Josephine
county; controversy over title TO prop
erty. Opi6u by Justice Johns. Judg'
F. NJ. Calkins reversed.
G. l.. Newman VS.. Multnomah Fue
company, appellant; appeal from Multi
nomah county; suit alleging breach Of
contract. Opion by Justice Johns. Jqdg'
1t ..Tf
John j. Smith vs.. J. Il. Headnc, ct al
! appellants; appeal from Columbia cOun
ty; suit to have q deed declared mort
gage. Opinion by Justice Bean. Judg'
james A. Eakiu affirmed.
Bell Nickel, appellant, vs. Effie Ma,
Terrin, ct al; appeal from Jackson eoul
ty; appeal from Judgment Of non.suit il
action to recover on promissory note
Opinion BY Justice Harris. Judge =. M
Calkins affirmed.
i A. G. Spexarth, appellant, VS.. W A
Sherman as county treasurer of Clatsol
county; appeal from Clatsop county
suit to restrain treasurer from collecting
penalty upon taxes. Opinion by Chic
Justice Mcbride. Judge j. A. Eakii
affirmed.
Lee MeCraeken vs., Bay City LAM
company, appellant; appeal from Tilla
nook county; suit to rescind eontrae
for the purchase Of lot in Central add
tion to Bay City. Opinion by Justic
Benson. Judge George R. Baglcy re
versed.
Petition for rehearing denied in cas-
Of Sailing VS.. First National Baak.