Conner v. Occidental Life Insurance

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Conner v. Occidental Life Insurance

255 S.E.2d 420, 41 N.C. App. 610, 1979 N.C. App. LEXIS 2652

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJune 5, 1979

DocketNo. 786DC789

StatusPublished

This text of 255 S.E.2d 420 (Conner v. Occidental Life Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Conner v. Occidental Life Insurance, 255 S.E.2d 420, 41 N.C. App. 610, 1979 N.C. App. LEXIS 2652 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

MITCHELL, Judge.

The plaintiff’s sole assignment of error on appeal is that the trial court erred in concluding that the insurance policy in ques[611]*611tion was not in effect at the time of the insured’s death. The policy had an effective date of 3 May 1976 and an expiration date of 2 December 1976 with no provisions for extensions or renewals. Although the insured died nine days after the expiration date of the policy, the plaintiff contends that the insurance policy was still in effect at that time by virtue of the terms of G.S. 58-211. We do not agree.

G.S. 58-211 requires that all group life insurance policies delivered in this State must contain:

(1) A provision that the policyholder is entitled to a grace period of 31 days for the payment of any premium due except the first, during which grace period the death benefit coverage shall continue in force, unless the policyholder shall have given the insurer written notice of discontinuance in advance of the date of discontinuance and in accordance with the terms of the policy.

This requirement does not apply in the present case.

At the time of the insured’s death on 11 December 1976, the policy had expired. At that time, no premium was due. The quoted provision in G.S. 58-211 only extends the time in which a premium may be paid; it does not extend the period of coverage. Since the insurance policy expired on 2 December 1976 and contained no provisions for extension or renewal, no payment for any premium was or could have been due after that date and no extension of the period of coverage arose. The policy was not in effect on and after that date notwithstanding the provisions of G. S. 58-211. Therefore, the plaintiff’s assignment of error is overruled and the judgment of the trial court is

Affirmed.

Judges Parker and Martin (Harry C.) concur.

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

MITCHELL, Judge.

The plaintiff’s sole assignment of error on appeal is that the trial court erred in concluding that the insurance policy in ques[611]*611tion was not in effect at the time of the insured’s death. The policy had an effective date of 3 May 1976 and an expiration date of 2 December 1976 with no provisions for extensions or renewals. Although the insured died nine days after the expiration date of the policy, the plaintiff contends that the insurance policy was still in effect at that time by virtue of the terms of G.S. 58-211. We do not agree.

G.S. 58-211 requires that all group life insurance policies delivered in this State must contain:

(1) A provision that the policyholder is entitled to a grace period of 31 days for the payment of any premium due except the first, during which grace period the death benefit coverage shall continue in force, unless the policyholder shall have given the insurer written notice of discontinuance in advance of the date of discontinuance and in accordance with the terms of the policy.

This requirement does not apply in the present case.

At the time of the insured’s death on 11 December 1976, the policy had expired. At that time, no premium was due. The quoted provision in G.S. 58-211 only extends the time in which a premium may be paid; it does not extend the period of coverage. Since the insurance policy expired on 2 December 1976 and contained no provisions for extension or renewal, no payment for any premium was or could have been due after that date and no extension of the period of coverage arose. The policy was not in effect on and after that date notwithstanding the provisions of G. S. 58-211. Therefore, the plaintiff’s assignment of error is overruled and the judgment of the trial court is

Affirmed.

Judges Parker and Martin (Harry C.) concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 S.E.2d 420, 41 N.C. App. 610, 1979 N.C. App. LEXIS 2652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conner-v-occidental-life-insurance-ncctapp-1979.