Supreme Court of Illinois, 1907.
232 Ill. 37, 83 N. E. 542, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 356, 122 Am. St. 54,
13 Ann. Cas. 129.

This is an action on a life insurance policy issued by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company on the life of Robert Kilpatrick. The provisions of the policy are set out in the declaration, one of which is, that the policy should be incontestable after two years except for the non-payment of premiums or for fraud.

Two defenses are set up in the pleas of the insurance company: First, that Kilpatrick was indicted, tried, convicted and executed for murder. * * * The plaintiff below demurred to the pleas. The demurrer was overruled, and the plaintiff electing to abide his demurrer, the court gave judgment against, him for costs. Upon an appeal to the Appellate Court for the First District the judgment of the circuit court of Cook county was affirmed. The case comes to this court on a certificate of importance, the amount involved being less than $1,000. * * *

Mr. Justice V`IcKEiis delivered the opinion of the court:

Whether the legal execution of the assured for a crime committed by him constituted a defense to an action by his legal representative on a life insurance policy is a question of first impression in this State. Where this defense has been sustained it is generally upon the ground that it is contrary to public policy to permit a recovery where the death is in consequence of a violation of the law. This is the basis of the decision of this case by the Appellate Court and is the main reason urged here in support of the judgment below.

It is said by the defendant in error that to permit a recovery on this policy would be contrary to the public policy of this State, as it would tend to remove a restraint thrown around persons who are tempted to commit crimes. The argument rests upon the same grounds that were urged centuries ago in support of the now obsolete doctrine of attainder and corruption of blood. In the earlier history of the common law various consequences other than the punishment of the offender followed conviction for felony, and in

legally executed. In a contest between the heirs and executrix of the murdered beneficiary (the company did not resist payment) it was held that the heirs would prevail. Allen v. Diamond (1926) 13 Fed. (2d) 579, Comment (1926) 25 Mich. L. Rev. 200.

A policy provided that if the beneficiary predeceased the insured the proceeds should go to the insured's estate. The insured murdered the beneficiary and then committed suicide. It was held that the beneficiary's administrator was entitled to the proceeds of the policy as against the insured's administrator since other-wise the insured's estate would benefit by his wrong. Box v. Lanier (1904) 112 Tenn. 393, 79 S. W. 1042, 64 L. R. A. 458, Comment (1904) 4 Colum. L. Rev. 513.

DEATH BY LEGAL EXECUTION   481

COLLINS v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO.