Furbee v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Furbee v. United States

73 F.2d 190, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2636

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 11, 1934

DocketNo. 3670

StatusPublished

This text of 73 F.2d 190 (Furbee v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Furbee v. United States, 73 F.2d 190, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2636 (4th Cir. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in the District Court sought to recover upon a war risk insurance policy, which lapsed for nonpayment of premiums on April 1, 1919, unless at that date the soldier was totally and permanently disabled. The suit was not brought until March 11, 1931. The canso of disability was said lo he tuberculosis, from whicli disease the insured died on April 1, 1931. There was, however, no evidence tending to show that the insured was so afflicted with the disease on April 1, 1919. Indeed the first positive diagnosis of lung impairment was made in 1922, and even then there was nothing to show that the disease was incurable. Hence there is nothing to distinguish this ease in principle from many others which have been considered by the courts. See Lumbra v. United States, 290 U. S. 551, 54 S. Ct. 272, 78 L. Ed. 492; United States v. Diehl (C. C. A.) 62 F.(2d) 343; Andrews v. United States (C. C. A.) 63 F. (2d) 184; Nicolay v. United States (C. C. A.) 51 F.(2d) 170; United States v. Sumner (C. C. A.) 69 F.(2d) 770.

The action of the District Court in directing a verdict for the defendant was unavoidable, and its judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in the District Court sought to recover upon a war risk insurance policy, which lapsed for nonpayment of premiums on April 1, 1919, unless at that date the soldier was totally and permanently disabled. The suit was not brought until March 11, 1931. The canso of disability was said lo he tuberculosis, from whicli disease the insured died on April 1, 1931. There was, however, no evidence tending to show that the insured was so afflicted with the disease on April 1, 1919. Indeed the first positive diagnosis of lung impairment was made in 1922, and even then there was nothing to show that the disease was incurable. Hence there is nothing to distinguish this ease in principle from many others which have been considered by the courts. See Lumbra v. United States, 290 U. S. 551, 54 S. Ct. 272, 78 L. Ed. 492; United States v. Diehl (C. C. A.) 62 F.(2d) 343; Andrews v. United States (C. C. A.) 63 F. (2d) 184; Nicolay v. United States (C. C. A.) 51 F.(2d) 170; United States v. Sumner (C. C. A.) 69 F.(2d) 770.

The action of the District Court in directing a verdict for the defendant was unavoidable, and its judgment is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 F.2d 190, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/furbee-v-united-states-ca4-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack