Grell v. Sam Houston Life Ins. Co.
This text of 157 S.W. 757 (Grell v. Sam Houston Life Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The appellee, on the 9th day of October, 1909, issued a policy upon the life of Frederick William Grell, husband of appellant, for her benefit, in the sum of $1,000. The premium was paid for the first year, and within said year the insured committed suicide. The trial court rendered judgment for appellee.
The policy sued on was incontestable after one year from the date of its issue, provided *758 tiie premiums were duly paid. Neither written, photographic, nor printed copies of the application for such policy accompanied the same. Appellant insists that this provision of the statute is not applicable to the policy sued on, for the reason that it contains an additional provision more onerous than that required by the statute. This alleged additional provision is as follows: “And is free from conditions as to residence, travel or place of death.” Appellant insists that this means that not only must the premiums be paid, but that the insured must not have violated the provisions of the policy as to residence, travel, or place of death. The application for the policy contains the following : “I also agree that if during the two years next following the date of the issue of the policy of insurance for which application is hereby made I shall, without written permission granted by said company, travel or reside elsewhere than in those parts of the United States of America tying north of the torrid zone and south of the 16th parallel of north latitude, etc., policy shall be void.” Said application also contains the following: “I also agree that military and naval service in time of war are risks not assumed by said company, and are not intended to be covered by said policy, unless a written permit therefor at the company’s regular rate of extra premium shall be granted. And that if I shall engage in any such service during the continuance of said policy, without such a permit, no claim shall exist under said policy except for the net reserve held against it, reckoned according to the legal standard of Texas.” The full clause in the face of the policy with reference to these matters reads as follows: “This contract shall be incontestable after one year from the date of its issue, provided the required premiums are duty paid, and is free from conditions as to residence, travel or place of death. No permit or extra premium will be required for military or naval service in time of war or in time of peace.” As we construe this clause, instead of being an additional burden upon the insured, it freed him from the conditions as to residence, travel, place of death and of obtaining permission to engage in military or naval service and the payment of extra premiums by reason thereof.
Rinding no error in the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
'Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
157 S.W. 757, 1913 Tex. App. LEXIS 1184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grell-v-sam-houston-life-ins-co-texapp-1913.