Court Opinion

ID: 9831137
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:51:01.416965+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:31.826216
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We have considered the motion for rehearing in this case in connection with the motion for rehearing in’Henry v. Railway Mail Mutual Benefit Association, 179 S.W. 2d 333, and refer to what we said in overruling that motion for rehearing.
’ We have also considered the effect, if any, of Article 5042, which is a part of Chapter 21 of Title 78, Revised Statutes. Chapter 21 is styled “General Provisions”, and is a part of what are considered the general insurance laws. Article 5043 is a part of Chapter 21, arid provides, as said in our original -opinion, that answers and statements made in the application for a policy shall not constitute a defense unless it be shown upon the trial that the matter or thing represented was material to the risk or actually contributed to the contingency or event on which the policy became due or payable. Article 5042 provides:
*339“No provision of this chapter shall apply to companies carrying on the business of life or casualty insurance on the assessment or annual premium plan, under the provisions of this title.”
We are not inclined to believe that Article 5042 serves to render Article 5043 inapplicable to this case. The policy in the present suit appears to provide for a flat premium of $6.04 per month. Also, we doubt if Article 5042, in referring to companies carrying on business on the assessment plan, was intended to cover fraternal benefit societies, because the latter are not referred to in the statutes as assessment companies, and in their nature are different from assessment companies, even though the dues, or premiums, might be considered, in a sense, as assessments. In the third place, the company here involved does not do business under any of the provisions of Title 78 which relate to assessment companies, but, as we have held, does business under the general insurance laws.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.