Leonhard v. Provident Savings Life Assur. Soc.

Citations

• 130 F. 287
• 64 C.C.A. 533
• 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4155

Syllabus

<p>1. Insurance — Surrender—Nonpayment oe Premiums — Forfeiture—Estoppel.</p> <p>Where plaintiff’s husband, acting as her agent, surrendered a policy on his life, in which plaintiff was named as beneficiary, providing for forfeiture for nonpayment of premiums, receiving in place thereof a policy on a different plan for plaintiff’s benefit, and defendant had no knowledge that the husband was not authorized to act for his wife in such surrender, the fact that defendant thereafter failed to give notice of the maturity of subsequent premiums on the surrendered policy, which was an essential prerequisite to insured’s default in the payment thereof, did not estop defendant from claiming a forfeiture of the surrendered policy for nonpayment of premiums.</p> <p>2. Same — Premiums on Other Policies — Application.</p> <p>Where plaintiff claimed that the original policy on her husband’s life had been surrendered by him without authority, and other policies taken in their stead, which she repudiated, she was not entitled to have premiums paid on the subsequent policies applied in satisfaction of premiums accruing on the original policy after surrender, in order to prevent a forfeiture thereof for nonpayment of premiums.</p> <p>3. Same — Acts op Agent — Liability op Pbincipal.</p> <p>Plaintiff’s husband, without her knowledge or authority, surrendered a policy on his life, in which plaintiff was named as beneficiary, for a different policy. The original policy had been in the husband’s possession as plaintiff’s agent for nearly 10 years, and thereafter, without fraud or deception practiced on plaintiff, she joined her husband in exchanging the second policy for a third; she, however, believing that she was exchanging the policy first issued. Held, that plaintiff was precluded from claiming that the first policy had not been lawfully surrendered and was still in force.</p>