DocketNumber: 30608
Citation Numbers: 71 Ga. App. 664
Judges: Felton
Filed Date: 9/20/1944
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Irrespective of which party had the burden of proof, a verdict for the insurance company was demanded, and the court did not err in directing a verdict for the coriipany, or in overruling the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. If the insured was sane, the evidence is conclusive that he deliberately committed suicide. If such was the case death was intentional, and therefore not accidental. If he was insane his death was directly or indirectly the result of mental infirmity, and this fact, under the provisions of the policy, precluded recovery of the double indemnity. See Harris v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 66 Ga. App. 761 (19 S. E. 2d, 199). In that ease death was caused directly or indirectly by disease, but the principle is the same if force and effect are given the terms of the policy sued on. It is not necessary here to discuss the applicability to this case of the decision of the Supreme Court in
Judgment affirmed.