Van Norman v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins.

52 N.W. 988, 51 Minn. 57, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 11
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedAugust 17, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 52 N.W. 988 (Van Norman v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Van Norman v. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins., 52 N.W. 988, 51 Minn. 57, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 11 (Mich. 1892).

Opinion

Dickinson, J.

This is an action upon a ten-year endowment life insurance policy, the right of action upon which the plaintiff acquired by assignment. The insurance was in the sum of $1,000, upon the life of one Bunse, to whom the policy was issued April 16, 1869. By its terms the amount of the insurance was payable twenty-two years thereafter, or upon the death of the assured, in case he should die within that period. His death not having occurred, the policy [63]*63matured April 16,1891. The controversy is as to whether the obligation of the defendant to make any payment was terminated by the default of the assured to perform the conditions of the contract in respect to the payments required to be made by him. There is no doubt as to the facts, but only as to the proper construction of the contract.

The consideration upon which the undertaking of the defendant was assumed is expressed in the policy to be “the annual premium in advance, consisting of an annual premium note of $26.21, (the interest upon which must be paid annually in cash at the date of maturity of the annual premium,) and of the annual cash premium of $40.10, to be paid at or before noon, on or before the 16th day of April in every year during the first ten years of the continuance of this policy. ” The policy further provided as follows:

“At each distribution of the surplus after three years from the date hereof, a due proportion of such surplus on each and every year’s business, during the continuance of this policy, will be returned to the said assured.
“And the said company further promises and agrees that, if default shall be made in the payment of any premium, it will pay, as above agreed, as many tenth parts of the original sum assured as there shall have been complete annual premiums paid at the time of such default. But, in order to secure such proportion of the policy, all premium notes must be taken up, or the interest thereon be paid annually in cash, on the date of the annual maturity of the premium, until the notes are canceled by returns of the surplus, or the whole policy will be forfeited, unless one or more annual payments have been made in full by cash payment or by the application of the dividend.
“This policy is issued and accepted by the parties in interest on the following express conditions: * * * (3) If the said premiums or the interest upon any note given for premiums shall not be paid on or before the days above mentioned for the payment thereof, * * * then, and in every such case, the company shall not be liable for the payment of the whole sum assured, but only for [64]*64such part thereof as is expressly stipulated above, and the remainder shall cease and determine.”

By the following tabular statement may most readily be shown the payments of premiums by the assured, including the giving of notes, the payment of interest on such notes, the time when such payments ceased by default of the assured, and the allowance of dividends by the defendant, which it applied on the note first given:

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

Related

De Almada v. Sovereign Camp of the Woodmen of the World
67 P.2d 474 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1937)
Timmerman v. Bankers Reserve Life Co.
122 Tex. 603 (Texas Supreme Court, 1933)
Timmerman v. Bankers' Reserve Life Co.
63 S.W.2d 687 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1933)
Oklahoma Fire Ins. Co. v. Reddington
1916 OK 448 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1916)
Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
135 N.W. 738 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1912)
McNaughton v. Des Moines Life Insurance
122 N.W. 764 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1909)
Goulding v. Ferrell
117 N.W. 1046 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1908)
Petrie v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance
100 N.W. 236 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1904)
Union Central Life Insurance v. Caldwell
58 S.W. 355 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 N.W. 988, 51 Minn. 57, 1892 Minn. LEXIS 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-norman-v-northwestern-mutual-life-ins-minn-1892.