Case Name: Joseph Ginell, Respondent, v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-05-16
Citations: 205 A.D. 494
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joseph Ginell, Respondent, v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 205
Pages: 494–497

Head Matter:
Joseph Ginell, Respondent, v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Appellant.
Third Department,
May 16, 1923.
Insurance — disability insurance — total and permanent disability — tuberculosis developing in an insured under sixty is permanent — “ permanent ” defined.
Under a policy of disability insurance which provides for sick benefit in case the insured suffers total and permanent disability, the insured, who became a victim of tuberculosis under the age of sixty, is entitled to receive payment on the basis of permanent disability.
The word “ permanent ” as used in the policy is applicable to a condition of disability which, while not transient, may, however, cease to exist in time.
Van Kirk and Hinman, JJ., dissent, with opinion.
Appeal by the defendant, The Prudential Insurance Company of America, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Saratoga on the 10th day of November, 1922, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial before the court without a jury at the Saratoga Trial Term.
Edgar T. Brackett [Spencer B. Eddy of counsel], for the appellant.
Rowe & Walsh [A. F. Walsh of counsel], for the respondent.

Opinion:
Hasbrouck, J.:
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Saratoga county bringing up for review the interpretation of a policy of insurance against physical or mental disability.
The plaintiff, under the age of sixty and having paid the premiums required to place his policy in force, became a victim of tuberculosis and was thereby disabled, with a permanency intended to be covered by the policy. The insurer claims not.
The policy in suit provides that the insurer will waive payment of its premiums during permanent disability; that the insured shall furnish due proof that he continues in a state of disability, and if he fails to do so he will be deemed to have recovered from his state of disability, and that if he recovers from such state of disability no further premiums shall be waived and no further monthly payments be made.
In using such language the parties must have understood that the disability though permanent might not continue.
The inexorable inference to be drawn as to the meaning of " permanent " is that it is applicable to a condition of disability which while not transient or ephemeral still may pass away.
The sense in which the word " permanent ° is used in the policy is that of its Latin derivation, per through maneo, to remain. The policy covers disease. One in which disability may remain through. Tuberculosis is just such a disease. It is difficult to say whether its arrest may be accomplished. It is a fixed disease, permanent in its nature and involving permanent or fixed incapacity in its victim to work for a prolonged period of time at best.
I recommend the affirmance of the judgment.
H. T. Kellogg, Acting P. J., and Kiley, J., concur; Van Kirk, J., dissents, with an opinion in which Hinman, J., concurs.