Reilly v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Insurance — Foreign insurance company — License of agent — Collection of commissions by agent. , Where a contract between a foreign insurance company and its agent provided for commissions to the agent, on insurance written by him, such agent cannot recover commissions on insurance written during a period when he had not been authorized by the Insurance Commissioner of the State of Pennsylvania to .transact business in the State as the agent of the defendant.

Appeal, No. 231, Jan. T., 1919, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Montgomery Co., March T., 1917, No. 99, for defendant n. o. v. in case of Edward A. Reilly to the use of John Scott, Jr., and Samuel S. Hartranft, Administrator d. b. n. of Linn Hartranft, deceased, v. Prudential Insurance Company of America. Assumpsit for commissions by an insurance agent against a foreign insurance company. Before Miller, J. At the trial it appeared that on May 17,1900, plaintiff obtained an application to defendant company from Charles T. Schoen for a large policy of insurance on the latter’s life. Plaintiff was appointed an agent of the company on June 1, 1900. On the same day the policy was delivered and the premium paid. On June 14, 1900, a State license was procured by the plaintiff to act as defendant’s agent. The contract was terminated by mutual consent on July 21, 1901. Suit was brought to recover commissions on the Schoen and other policies. Verdict for plaintiff for $7,309.73. The court, in an opinion by Miller, J., entered judgment for defendant n. o. v. The last paragraph of the opinion was as follows: We, therefore, in conclusion and in order that the single reason that compels our action may be briefly set down at the end of this opinion, repeat that the plaintiffs cannot recover and the defendant is entitled to judgment only because when Mr. Reilly obtained the Schoen risk, he had not been authorized by the insurance commissioner to transact business in this State as an agent of the defendant foreign insurance company. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant n. o. v.