Feinberg v. New York Life Insurance

Citations

• 256 Pa. 61
• 100 A. 538
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 562

Syllabus

<p>Insurance — Life insurance — Application — Medical questions— False statement — Recovery—Act of May 11, 1881, P. L. £0.</p> <p>1. Where the sole reason for refusing payment to the beneficiary of an insurance policy is the alleged fraudulent representations by •which defendant was induced to issue the policy, the burden of proving fraud is upon the defendant.</p> <p>2. In an action on a life insurance policy the introduction in evidence of the application for insurance and examiner’s report followed by evidence that the answers to certain questions contained therein were untrue does not meet the burden of proof, where it appears that by reason of the applicant’s inability to either read or write the English language, the answers to questions were written in the application and medical examiner’s report by representatives of defendant, and where it does not appear that the answers inserted in the blank forms were read over to the applicant, and particularly where it appears that the application was signed in blank by the applicant and filled in the following day at the agent’s office, from memoranda made by him.</p> <p>3. In such case whether the answer of the applicant were correctly transcribed by defendant’s representative was a question for the jury.</p> <p>4. Where there was evidence that the applicant was suffering from a disease of such latent character that its presence was not' discovered by defendant’s examining physician, the court properly charged that the applicant’s answers were not fraudulent even though'not in accordance with, the facts, and defendant’s rights were sufficiently protected by instructions to the effect that if the applicant made the statements set forth in the answers, knowing they were false, and the policies were issued in reliance upon them, and defendant promptly rescinded the contract on ascertaining the truth, there should he no recovery.</p> <p>5. Where in such case the application was not made part of the policy, and where the