French v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'n ( 1892 )

ClaRK, J.:

We think the instruction of his Honor was correct. The reasonable construction to be put upon the agree ment of the parties, as expressed in the conditions printed upon the reinstatement receipt, was not that any illness, however slight or insignificant, within the preceding twelve months, should vitiate the reinstatement. It could mean no more than that, if there had been such illness or impairment of health that the assured would not have been received if he had been an original applicant for insurance, the reinstatement was void The company could not have intended to put itself in a better condition, or the defendant in a worse one, than that. Had the policy been maintained in force, impairment of health would not give the company a right to cancel it; as it had lapsed, the company, in effect, sa} s to the assured that it will reinstate him upon payment of unpaid dues, provided he is in unimpaired health and would be insurable as a new risk. The language of the condition is, if the assured is of temperate habits, and is now and “ has been during the past twelve months in continuous good health and free from all disease, infirmity or weakness.” The issue presents the question if there had been a compliance with that condition. The Court below told the jury that if the assured, during the twelve months prior to the reinstatement had suffered no illness, “ except of a temporary nature and not severe in its Character, which did not render him uninsurable, which indicated no vice in his constitution, and from ■ which he had entirely recovered at the time of making the payment,” this was a compliance with the condition of the receipt. The jury found the fact so to be. Upon such finding the plaintiff should be entitled to recover the amount duo by the terms of the policy of insurance. The simple question is as to the construction to be placed upon the condition. No aid can be drawn from decisions in cases more or less similar in other States. Certainly a slight illness did not come within the terms quoted. The line must be drawn somewhere. We think that indicated in the charge a just one.

No Error.

MacRae, J., dissents.