Ulrich v. Reinoehl

Citations

• 143 Pa. 238
• 22 A. 862
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 920

Syllabus

<p>[To be reported.]</p> <p>1. A creditor may lawfully take out a policy of insurance on the life of his debtor in an amount sufficient to cover the debt, with interest, and the cost of such insurance with interest thereon, during the period of the debtor’s expectancy of life according to the Carlisle Tables; but if such amount be exceeded, the policy may be a wagering transaction.</p> <p>2. The fact that in assessment insurance the cost of the policy cannot be calculated beforehand with precision, does not render it an exception to the limitations of the above rule. • Even in such insurance, a reasonable approximation is possible; and, as the law does not exact impossibilities, a slight mistake will not necessarily vitiate a policy taken out in good faith.</p> <p>3. A policy for $3,000 to cover a debt of $100 may be declared a wager, as matter of law, when the apparent disproportion between the two sums is unexplained: Cooper v. Shaeffer, 20 W. N. 123; but evidence of the debtor’s expectancy of life, and the cost of maintaining the policy during that period, is admissible to show that the seeming disproportion was not an actual one.</p> <p>4. In an action by the executor of the insured for money collected on such a policy by the payee, the testimony for defendant tending to show that if the insured had lived out his expectancy, the assessments and interest thereon would have exceeded the amount of the policy, and that the transaction was bona fide, the case was properly submitted to the jury: Gilbert v. Moose, 104 Pa. 74, and cases following it, distinguished.</p>