Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Middleton
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment for plaintiff on a life insurance policy. The defense was based on alleged false .statements in the application respecting consultation with physicians; and the only question presented by the appeal is whether verdict should have been directed for defendant on that ground. There was a question as to whether certain consultations involved matters of sufficient importance to be deemed material within the applicable rule. See Modern Woodmen of America v. Lawson, 110 Va. 81 , 65 S.E. 509 , 135 Am.St.Rep. 927 ; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Franklin, 118 Va. 418 , 87 S.E. 584 ; Combs v. Equitable Life Ins. Co., 4 Cir., 120 F.2d 432, 436-437 . There was evidence that one consultation was with respect to a heart ailment; but, in view of other testimony in the case, there was a question as to whether this consultation actually occurred, with the burden upon defendant to establish it. All of these matters were properly left to the jury under a charge to which no exception has been taken.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.