Case Name: GILMORE et al. v. MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1934-08-10
Citations: 179 Ga. 267
Docket Number: No. 9879
Parties: GILMORE et al. v. MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.
Judges: All-Hie Justices concur, Atlcinson and Gilbert, JJ., specially.
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 179
Pages: 267–278

Head Matter:
GILMORE et al. v. MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.
No. 9879.
August 10, 1934.
Reese, Scarlett, Bennett & Highsmith and Highsmith ,& High-smith, for plaintiffs.
Howell, Heyman & Bolding and J. B. Moore, for defendant.

Opinion:
Per, Curiam;.
The decision in the case of New York Life Insurance Co. v. Gilmore, 171 Ga. 894 (157 S. E. 188), controls this case adversely to the plaintiffs. The parties are not the same, but the two cases involved the same facts and the same issues, except one which is dealt with in the third paragraph, infra.
The plaintiffs requested this court to review and overrule the decision in New York Life Insurance Co. v. Gilmore, supra. The court not being unanimous in favor of reviewing and overruling the case, the request is denied.
It is contended that Civil Code (1910), § 3033, as construed in the New York Life Insurance Company case, supra, is void, because said section thus construed has the effect of depriv mg petitioners of their property and property rights without due process of law, and therefore contravenes the due-process clauses of the State and Federal constitutions. Civil Code (1910), § 6359, 6700. "When the parties have been fully heard in the regular course of judicial proceedings, an erroneous decision of a State court does not deprive the unsuccessful party of his property without due process of law, within the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90 [23 L. ed. 678]; Head v. Amoskeag Co., 113 U. S. 9, 26 [5 Sup. Ct. 441, 28 L. ed. 889]; Morley v. Lake Shore Railroad, 146 U. S. 162, 171 [13 Sup. Ct. 54, 36 L. ed. 925]; Bergemann v. Backer, 157 U. S. 655 [15 Sup. Ct. 727, 39 L. ed. 845]." Central Land Co. v. Laidley, 159 U. S. 103, 112 (16 Sup. Ct. 80, 40 L. ed. 91). See also 2 Honnold's Supreme Court Law, 846, 850; Herndon v. State, 178 Ga. 832 (174 S. E. 597).
Judgment affirmed.
All-Hie Justices concur, Atlcinson and Gilbert, JJ., specially.