Green v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Green v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co.

390 So. 2d 977, 1980 La. App. LEXIS 4640

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedOctober 28, 1980

DocketNo. 14323

StatusPublished

This text of 390 So. 2d 977 (Green v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Green v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co., 390 So. 2d 977, 1980 La. App. LEXIS 4640 (La. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

MARVIN, Judge.

As beneficiary of an insurance policy on the life of his wife, the husband appeals a judgment rejecting his demands for increased policy proceeds which were provided for accidental death of the insured. The sole issue is whether the record supports the trial court’s finding that the insured committed suicide by shooting herself.

Suicide is an affirmative defense which must be proved by the insurer. CCP 1005, Webster v. New York Life Ins. Co., 160 La. 854, 107 So. 599 (1926); Newdigate v. Acacia Mut. Life Ass’n, 180 La. 979, 158 So. 358 (1934).

[978]*978Here we have credible witnesses testifying that on more than one occasion between the time the gunshot wound was inflicted (July 9, 1979) and the time of death (July 14, 1979), the decedent, while conscious and rational, stated that she intended to kill herself. Other evidence supports the finding that decedent had been despondent and in ill health and that she had attempted suicide in 1978 and again in the last month of her life by overdosing herself with medication.

When the husband discovered his wife wounded with the pistol laying nearby, he immediately telephoned his then employer-friend that she “has just shot herself ...” and asked for assistance. When the wife’s best friend entered to attend the wife on the floor of the family mobile home, the wife made declarations of her intent. Again in the ambulance on the way to the hospital and later in the hospital, the wife made declarations of her intent. The trial court did not err either in obviously rejecting the testimony of the husband that his wife was not contemplating, and had no reason to commit, suicide, or in weighing the totality of the evidence, even if that evidence be deemed contradictory.

At appellant’s cost, judgment is AFFIRMED.

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

MARVIN, Judge.

As beneficiary of an insurance policy on the life of his wife, the husband appeals a judgment rejecting his demands for increased policy proceeds which were provided for accidental death of the insured. The sole issue is whether the record supports the trial court’s finding that the insured committed suicide by shooting herself.

Suicide is an affirmative defense which must be proved by the insurer. CCP 1005, Webster v. New York Life Ins. Co., 160 La. 854, 107 So. 599 (1926); Newdigate v. Acacia Mut. Life Ass’n, 180 La. 979, 158 So. 358 (1934).

[978]*978Here we have credible witnesses testifying that on more than one occasion between the time the gunshot wound was inflicted (July 9, 1979) and the time of death (July 14, 1979), the decedent, while conscious and rational, stated that she intended to kill herself. Other evidence supports the finding that decedent had been despondent and in ill health and that she had attempted suicide in 1978 and again in the last month of her life by overdosing herself with medication.

When the husband discovered his wife wounded with the pistol laying nearby, he immediately telephoned his then employer-friend that she “has just shot herself ...” and asked for assistance. When the wife’s best friend entered to attend the wife on the floor of the family mobile home, the wife made declarations of her intent. Again in the ambulance on the way to the hospital and later in the hospital, the wife made declarations of her intent. The trial court did not err either in obviously rejecting the testimony of the husband that his wife was not contemplating, and had no reason to commit, suicide, or in weighing the totality of the evidence, even if that evidence be deemed contradictory.

At appellant’s cost, judgment is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

390 So. 2d 977, 1980 La. App. LEXIS 4640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-southern-farm-bureau-life-insurance-co-lactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack