Stanley Matthews

Name: Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court
Author: Stanley Matthews

Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Stanley Matthews. It explores elements such as sunstroke, Trefz and policy.

Quotes from Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court (Stanley Matthews)

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ The applicant, it is true, was the wife, and it is her agreement that the answers shall be true; but it is manifest that the party interrogated, and whose answers are relied on, are those of the person whose life is the subject of the insurance.
Indeed, the original applications themselves speak of the allegations, misrepresentations, or concealments, if any, contained in the proposal, the existence of which will avoid the policy, as pertaining to 'my health or habits,' as though the person whose life was the subject of the insurance was himself the applicant. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ It is objected that the court erred in mistaking the answers referred to, as made by the husband, instead of the wife, who was in fact the applicant, whose answers they were, and that there was no proof that she was not a native citizen, and fully acquainted with the English language.
It is perhaps a palliation of this error, if it be one, that the counsel who makes the objection himself fell into it, in the very request which the court refused, and which speaks of the answer as that of the husband. And practically it was, and was so considered and treated by all parties to the insurance. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ From this authority, then, it sufficiently appears that a man working in the heat of summer in a hay-field, exposed to the rays of the sun, may be overcome by the heat to the point of exhaustion, so as to be prostrated with weakness, and even fall into insensibility and unconsciousness, without having sunstroke in its technical sense. And thus that it might well be that Trefz, notwithstanding his attack of what he ignorantly called sunstroke, might truthfully answer that he had never been sick of any disease of the brain. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ In the present instance, the apparent purpose of the charge asked by the counsel for the defendant below and refused by the court, was to charge as a matter of law that the answer of Trefz never sick-was to be taken as meaning-as it literally does, standing by itself-that he had never during his life had any sickness whatever, and thence to draw the necessary inference that it was untrue in that sense, as it no doubt was, and that, for that reason, the plaintiff's recovery was made legally impossible. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ In other words, that it is matter of law that if Trefz said he had sunstroke, that he did have it; and that it is matter of law that sunstroke, of whatever character or degree in fact, is a disease of the brain, that being the disease in respect to which it is claimed the answer was untrue. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ It is argued that the charge assumes from the testimony that the sunstroke spoken of occurred before the date of the original policies, when in the conversation with Dr. Derby, no date being given, he might well have inferred that it was subsequent to that date. But it is entirely immaterial, for however it may weaken the force of the suggestion upon the question of fact, it does not show that it contained any error in law. The force of the suggestion was to be judged by the jury upon their own finding as to the facts. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ It is not a formal instrument, employing technical language with well-ascertained legal effect, like a deed or a bill of lading, or framed with precision and nicety as to the choice of phrases to express a certain and definite covenant which the parties, duly advised, have entered into with deliberation and in solemn form. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Matthews, Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court

“ Trefz, and whether it was of such a character or nature as to make his reply to the interrogatories a falsehood or not. It is for the jury to say from the evidence, in regard to the extent, nature, and kind of sickness, whether the attack which the insured suffered from was of a character to make his answer 'never sick' a falsehood. The burden of proof is on the defendant. ”

Stanley Matthews

Summary

Quotes from Insurance Company v. Trefz — Opinion of the Court (Stanley Matthews)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature