Court Opinion

ID: 9637281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:02:24.082709+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:55.069677
License: Public Domain

SIBLEY, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
The policy in this case promises on the occurrence of the disability it defines to waive payment of premiums “during such disability” and to make monthly payments “during its continuance.” Greenfield’s policy with the New York Life Ins. Co. in the companion case to this today decided promises 'payments “during the period of continuous total disability.” The continuance of the disability is open to enquiry as to each payment. A declaratory judgment cannot settle this fact question beyond the date of its rendition. Only premiums to be waived and payments to be made prior to that date can ordinarily be included in the amount in a controversy as to a state of health.
Mutual Benefit Ass’n v. Fortenberry, 5 Cir., 98 F.2d 570, does not bear on the question. It was a suit brought by the insurer to cancel the entire policy for fraud. The whole value of the policy was in controversy, and not merely the disability payments which the insured was then claiming.
In Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 109 F.2d 388, a declaratory judgment was sought by the insurer touching its liability for disability payments, but the record shows that there was consolidated with it a suit to enjoin pending actions in state courts for such payments, and to permanently enjoin the bringing of any more such actions under the policy. The appeal was from the grant of a temporary injunction and the jurisdiction to grant the injunction was in question; not that to make a declaratory judgment. The injunction which was prayed for, if finally grant*953ed, would destroy all right to claim at any time any disability payments, and would be in effect a cancellation of that part of the policy, as the opinion assumes. The whole value of that part of the policy was put in controversy by the pleadings. Before this court ruled on the temporary injunction, more than $3000 of disability payments were actually due, if any were.
In the present cases only present disability payments and presently waivable premiums are in controversy, not the whole disability insurance.