Columbian National Life Insurance v. Mulkey

79 S.E. 482, 13 Ga. App. 508, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 242
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedAugust 25, 1913
Docket4998
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 79 S.E. 482 (Columbian National Life Insurance v. Mulkey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Columbian National Life Insurance v. Mulkey, 79 S.E. 482, 13 Ga. App. 508, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 242 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

“The failure to pay a promissory note, taken in payment of an insurance policy (although it is stipulated in the note that the nonpayment of the same at maturity will avoid the policy), will not forfeit the policy, where there is no condition in the policy itself providing for its forfeiture for the non-payment of notes.” “When'the condition as to forfeiture for non-payment on maturity of a note given for the premium is contained only in the note, the mere fact that the note is not paid at maturity does not of itself avoid the policy. Such a provision is a condition subsequent, of which the company must avail itself by clear and unequivocal acts.” The decision in Arnold v. Empire Insurance Co., 3 Ga. App. 685 (60 S. E. 470), is controlling. There is no conflict between the decision in that case and the decision of the Supreme Court in Stephenson v. Empire Life Insurance Co., 139 Ga. 82 (76 S. E. 592). In the Stephenson ease the provision relating to forfeiture for non-payment of premium notes was contained in the policy itself; in the Arnold case it was in the premium note only; and in the instant case the condition was contained, not in the policy contract, but only in the note, and is therefore within the ruling in the Arnold case. Joyce on Insurance, § 1211; May on Insurance, § 345e. Judgment affirmed.

A general demurrer to the petition was overruled, and the defendant excepted. WatTcins & Latimer, for plaintiff in error. Horton Brothers & Burress, Anderson & Rountree, contra.

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

Related

Reliance Life Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh v. Lowry
156 So. 570 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Ritter v. American Life Insurance
203 N.W. 503 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1925)
Coughlin v. Reliance Life Insurance
201 N.W. 920 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1925)
Bankers Reserve Life Co. v. Rice
1924 OK 533 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1924)
Stansall v. Columbian National Life Insurance
109 S.E. 297 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Columbian National Life Insurance v. Mulkey
91 S.E. 344 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Sims v. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance
89 S.E. 445 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
French v. Columbia Life & Trust Co.
156 P. 1042 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 S.E. 482, 13 Ga. App. 508, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbian-national-life-insurance-v-mulkey-gactapp-1913.