Cauley v. General American Life Insurance

14 S.E.2d 39, 219 N.C. 398, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 335
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedApril 9, 1941
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 14 S.E.2d 39 (Cauley v. General American Life Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cauley v. General American Life Insurance, 14 S.E.2d 39, 219 N.C. 398, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 335 (N.C. 1941).

Opinion

*400 Stacy, C. J.

It is generally understood that the nonpayment of a premium when due, or within the period of grace thereafter, in the absence of some extension or waiver, automatically avoids a policy of insurance. Rees v. Ins. Co., 216 N. C., 428, 5 S. E. (2d), 154; Allen v. Ins. Co., 215 N. C., 70, 1 S. E. (2d), 94. This was the theory upon which the case was tried, and it is the basis of the nonsuit. Williamson v. Ins. Co., 212 N. C., 377, 193 S. E., 273. It is also understood that the giving of a worthless check is not payment. Hayworth v. Ins. Co., 190 N. C., 757, 130 S. E., 612. Nor is the case of Ferrell v. Ins. Co., 210 N. C., 831, 187 S. E., 575; S. c., 208 N. C., 420, 181 S. E., 327; S. c., 207 N. C., 51, 175 S. E., 692, authority for a contrary holding.

Here, however, there is no concession that a worthless check was given in payment of the premium due 1 August, 1939. It is the contention of the plaintiff that this check was wrongfully dishonored by the bank, and there is evidence to support the contention. This makes it a case for the jury. Smith v. Ins. Co., 216 N. C., 152, 4 S. E. (2d), 321.

The conditional receipt issued by the Association shows that the check was received subject to “final cash returns.” The insured customarily paid his premiums by check, and it is conceded that the check in question would have kept the insurance in force but for its dishonor on 12 September. If it should be found the bank was in error in returning the check and accordingly the “final cash returns” are still rightfully available to the Association, the judgment of nonsuit would seem to be at variance with the rights of the plaintiff. Otherwise the defendant may again prevail. Hayworth v. Ins. Co., supra.

’Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Choice Floor Covering Co.
436 S.E.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
Sawyer v. North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance
323 S.E.2d 450 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
Thomas v. Ray
317 S.E.2d 53 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
Parnell-Martin Supply Co. v. High Point Motor Lodge, Inc.
177 S.E.2d 392 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1970)
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Smith
172 S.E.2d 708 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1970)
General American Life Insurance v. Stadiem
25 S.E.2d 202 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Cauley v. General American Life Insurance
17 S.E.2d 221 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 S.E.2d 39, 219 N.C. 398, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cauley-v-general-american-life-insurance-nc-1941.