TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Sanders v. Independent Natl. Life Ins.

SANDERS v. INDEPENDENT NATL. LIFE INS. CO.

Sanders v. Indep. Natl. Life Ins., 133 So. 451 (La. Ct. App. 1931)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 23, 1931
Docket
No. 13,567
Judges
Westerfield
Citations
133 So. 45116 La. App. 2121931 La. App. LEXIS 447

Opinion of the Court — Westerfield

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

WESTERFIELD, J.

The plaintiff, a beneficiary under a policy of industrial life insurance, brings this suit for $126, the face value of the policy. The case is defended upon the ground that the policy had lapsed because of the failure to pay premiums. Answering this contention plaintiff claims that an attempt was made to pay the premiums, but that the defendant insurance company refused to accept further payments because of the fact that someone living in the same house with her had contracted tuberculosis and the officials of the company were, unwilling to take-the risk of infection, which further transactions with her might involve.

Of course, if the premiums were tendered and arbitrarily refused the policy did not lapse. Newton v. National Life Ins. Co., 161 La. 357 , 108 So. 769 . The testimony of plaintiff and that of her daughter, who testified in her behalf, is in hopeless conflict with that of the manager and the cashier of defendant company, but Mr. Johnston Armstrong, a member of this bar, without any interest in the litigation, testified that the plaintiff called upon him and endeavored to have the company accept premiums and that he called at the office of defendant company for that purpose and was there informed that the premiums would not be accepted for a sufficient reason, and “the courts were open to him if he had any claim.” His testimony is sufficient to resolve the doubt created by the conflicting evidence in favor of the plaintiff. This was evidently the view of the trial court and we believe its judgment was correct.

For the reasons assigned the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1932: 11937: 21938: 11939: 11944: 11945: 21946: 21954: 11963: 119322026peak 1937 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Rice v. California-Western States Life Insurance70 P.2d 516 (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)
  2. Finch v. Baton Rouge Production Credit Association154 So. 2d 60 (La. Ct. App. 1963)
  3. Richardson v. Charles Kirsch & Co.187 So. 1 (La. 1939)
  4. Francis v. Blache17 So. 2d 29 (La. Ct. App. 1944)
  5. Martin v. Fontenot27 So. 2d 457 (La. Ct. App. 1946)
  6. Williams Inv. Co. v. McWilliams142 So. 611 (La. 1932)

Most recent

  1. Finch v. Baton Rouge Production Credit Association154 So. 2d 60 (La. Ct. App. 1963)
  2. Succession of Jenkins76 So. 2d 450 (La. Ct. App. 1954)
  3. Martin v. Fontenot27 So. 2d 457 (La. Ct. App. 1946)
  4. Futorian v. Gerth25 So. 2d 366 (La. Ct. App. 1946)
  5. De Salvo v. Doll21 So. 2d 60 (La. Ct. App. 1945)
  6. Schroeder v. Morris20 So. 2d 437 (La. Ct. App. 1945)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Newton v. Nat'l Life Ins. Co. U.S.A., 108 So. 769 (La. 1926) 18

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list