Skip to main content
· 3/15/1921

Mutual Life Ins. v. Vaughan

Citations

  • 125 Miss. 369
  • 88 So. 11

Syllabus

<p>1. INSURANCE. Delivery of policy Toy agent in violation of instructions to secure medical certificates held act of insurer.</p> <p>Where an insurance company executed a policy and sent it to an agent in this state to he delivered when the insured furnished a health certificate by one of its examining physicians, but no such provisions were in the policy, but in a letter of instructions, and the agent delivered the policy without complying with the instructions, the delivery by the agent is the act of the company, under section 2615, Code 1906 (section 5078, Hemingway’s Code), and the policy is valid in the hands of the insured-' or his beneficiary, though no health fcertificate was furnished the agent or the company.</p> <p>2. Insurance. Insurer’s liability depends on good health in fact' where agent delivers policy without medical certificate; violation of rule by agent requiring medical certificate held not to invalidate policy.</p> <p>In such case where the policy stipulates that the policy should not be in effect unless the insured was in good health when the policy was delivered to and accepted by the insured, the question of liability depends upon the fact of good health, and if the insured was in fact in good health when it was delivered, it is not avoided because the company had a rule for the government of its agents that it should not be delivered without a medical examination by its examining physical, where more than sixty days had elapsed from the first examination, where such rule was not brought to the knowledge of the insured.</p> <p>3. Insurance. Acknowledgment of receipt of premium in policy held conclusive against insurer in favor of beneficiary.</p> <p>Where an insurance policy recited on its face, “In consideration of the annual premium of Fifty and 10/100 dollars, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,” such recital is more than a mere receipt; it is contractual, and is conclusive against the company in favor of the beneficiary so far

Judges: Ethridge

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.