Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co.

Citations

• 117 Wash. 7
• 200 P. 587
• 1921 Wash. LEXIS 1006

Syllabus

<p>Appeal (454) — Review—Harmless Error — Admission of Evidence Otherwise Established. The admission of hearsay evidence is not prejudicial error where it is addressed to matter already properly put in evidence.</p> <p>Same (123) — Preservation of Grounds — Objections to Evidence. The improper admission of testimony cannot be urged as error on appeal where it was not objected to at the time, nor motion to strike interposed.</p> <p>Insurance (185) — Accident Insurance — Cause of Death — Evidence — Sufficiency. The direct cause of death, in an action on an accident insurance policy, was properly a question for the jury under evidence showing death was caused by° blood poisoning which resulted from a cut on the finger, the cutting and the inoculation being simultaneous.</p> <p>Same (128) — Accident Insurance — Death of Insured — “External, Violent and Accidental Means” — Construction of Policy. Where an accident policy insured against all the effects of bodily injury caused directly, solely and independently of all other causes by external, violent and accidental means, the beneficiary was entitled to recover the full indemnity for death, which was due to blood poisoning resulting from an accidental cut, though another provision of the policy limited liability to one month’s indemnity in case of death from blood poisoning; since the cutting of insured’s finger, inducing blood poisoning, was the direct and external means whereby death resulted.</p> <p>Same (127) — Accident Insurance — Classification of Risk. Under a provision of an accident policy insuring against bodily injury resulting in continuous disability from the date of the accident, it is not contemplated that there must be a disability from the very moment of injury; hence, where the insured became sick with blood poisoning within twelve hours after cutting his finger, and on the third day after the injury took to his bed, which he never left, the injury was one coming within the “continuous disability” claus