The Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Bobbitt

188 So. 843, 137 Fla. 838, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1919
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMay 16, 1939
StatusPublished

This text of 188 So. 843 (The Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Bobbitt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Bobbitt, 188 So. 843, 137 Fla. 838, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1919 (Fla. 1939).

Opinion

Buford, J.

The writ of error brings for review judgment in favor'of the plaintiff.

The record shows that the policy was issued to Aubrey M. Bobbitt on the 9th day of September, 1930, in the sum of $5,000.00.

The amended declaration filed September 29th, 1936, alleged:

“On the ninth day of September, A. D. 1930, in consideration of the payment by Aubrey M. Bobbitt of the sum of $59.05 and of the like sum on the ninth day of December, March, June and September in each year thereafter during the continuance of the policy of insurance, the defendant made and delivered to Aubrey M. Bobbitt, in the sum of $5,000.00, said policy made payable to Rita Belle Bobbitt, wife of the said Aubrey M. Bobbitt; that the said Aubrey M. Bobbitt duly fulfilled all the conditions of said insurance on his part, including the payment of premiums as aforesaid. On the fourth day of May, A. D. 1934, Aubrey M. Bobbitt died at Clearwater, Florida, leaving as beneficiary of the above described policy his wife, Rita Belle Bobbitt, the plaintiff herein; that upon the death of Aubrey M. Bobbitt, as aforesaid, there became due and payable under the terms of the said policy of insurance from the said defendant the sum of $5,000.00 to be paid *840 as provided in said policy; together with a reasonable sum as fees and compensation for the plaintiff’s attorney in prosecuting this suit, all of which will more fully appear by copy of said policy of insurance, which is attached to the Bill of Complaint, heretofore filed in this cause and made a part of this amended declaration.
“But this plaintiff has not been paid the said sum, or sums of money, or any part thereof, by the said defendant, wherefore, she brings this her suit and claims the sum of $10,000.00 damages.”

The amended third plea was as follows:

“That on or about the 9th day of September, 1930, it made and delivered its policy of insurance on the life of Aubrey M. Bobbitt, and that by the terms of said policy the defendant agreed to pay to the beneficiary designated in said policy in event of the death of the said Aubrey M. Bobbitt, the sum of $5,000.00, only upon the condition that the premiums thereon were duly paid on or before the respective dates when due, and that insured perform all the other conditions required in said policy to be performed by him; and that said sum was to be paid at the home office in the City of Philadelphia, or to its agent; and defendant avers that said contract was made in consideration of the written application of the insured which was made a part thereof, and in further consideration of the sum of $59.05, to be paid in advance, the payment of a like sum on the 9th day of December, 1930, and the, payment of a like sum on the 9th day of March, June, September and December in every year thereafter, during the continuance of said policy, and for no other consideration, as will more fully appear by copies of said policy of insurance attached to the Bill of Complaint, in chancery action No. 17,591, and by reference thereto made a part hereof, the same as if incorporated herein. The defendant says that before the *841 lapse of said policy hereinafter alleged on, to-wit: the 7th day of March, 1933, the said Aubrey M. Babbitt obtained from said defendant loans on said policy in the amount of $203.16, which said amount was determined in the following manner; the said insured borrowed from defendant, on the 30th day of April, 1932, sufficient funds to pay the premiums due on said policy in December, 1931, and March, 1932, which amount was $118.10, less $18.48 dividend accruals, or a total of $99.62, as represented by a Certificate of Outstanding Lien, duly signed by insured, a true copy of same being attached to Pleas to Declaration filed by the defendant in this cause, and by reference thereto made a part hereof, the same as if incorporated herein; the quarterly premium of $59.05 due June 9th, 1932, was paid by a loan of said amount to.plaintiff by this defendant, pursuant to a request for lien note settlement, duly signed by insured, a true copy of said request being attached to Pleas to Declaration filed by the defendant in this cause, being marked Defendant’s Exhibit ‘B,’ and by reference thereto made a part hereof, the same as if incorporated herein; the quarterly premium due September 9th, 1932, of $59.05 was paid by a loan of said amount to plaintiff by this defendant, pursuant to a request for lien note settlement, duly signed by insured, a true copy of said request being attached to Pleas to Declaration filed by the defendant in this cause, being marked Defendant’s Exhibit ‘C’ and by reference thereto made a part hereof, the same as if incorporated herein; subtracted from the last two notes were dividend accruals of $9.24 and $9.82 respectively, and interest of $5.50 added, making a total of $203.16 which amount was never repaid to defendant. Defendant further says that the premium payment of $59.05 due on December 9th, 1932, was never paid, either by loan or otherwise, nor was any payment made to *842 defendant, by loan or otherwise, on account of the premiums accruing on said policy subsequent to the loan for the premium due September 9, 1932. The 'defendant avers that it was provided by the terms of said policy that, in case of default in the payment of premium after two years premium had been paid in full, the insurer would, subject to existing indebtedness, extend automatically the face amount of policy as Term Insurance, without participation, for such period as provided by the table included in, and made a part of, said policy; or purchase paid up participating life insurance under proper written application within one month from date of lapse; or pay the cash value of the policy upon proper release and delivery of this policy within one month from the date of lapse, and it was further provided that, if at the time of default in the payment of any premium there should be any indebtedness on account of the policy, then the said options of settlement should be correspondingly reduced; and defendant says that at the time of said default in the payment of premiums there was an indebtedness on account thereof in the amount hereinbefore stated, whereby the term of extended insurance was reduced to the period hereinafter mentioned. Defendant further avers that on March 7th, 1933, it sent a notice of lapse to' said insured; that said insured did not demand the cash value of the policy, or paid up participating life insurance, but elected to take advantage of the provision thereof to have the same automatically extended for the period therein provided, which, in the event there had been no indebtedness against the policy, would have been for such period as provided by the table included in and made a part of, said policy, * * * but defendant says that the option of settlement by way of extended insurance for such period was applicable only in case there was no indebtedness against the policy, it being *843

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

Related

Waddell v. New England Mutual Life Insurance
147 N.E. 816 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1924)
Neal v. Columbian Mutual Life Assurance Society
138 So. 353 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1931)
Underwood v. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance
98 S.E. 832 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1919)
Amicable Life Ins. Co. v. White
38 S.W.2d 860 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1931)
Pavy v. Franklin Life Ins.
51 So. 191 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
188 So. 843, 137 Fla. 838, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-penn-mutual-life-ins-co-v-bobbitt-fla-1939.