You are reading a page from Cases and other materials on the Law of Insurance, George W. Goble (1931)
Part of the American Term Life Insurance History Project
Term Life Insurance
Previous Cases on Insurance Law (1931) Next

 

498   MATURITY OF THE POLICY

over a log in the swamp, his feet, his hands, and a part of his head frozen into the thin ice that covered the swami).

Appellant's statements in the brief that insured became lost and that he "came to his death by the exposure he was subjected to and the bitter cold weather" are approved by appellee. Both sides re-quested directed verdict. Plaintiff had judgment on directed verdict for $2,000 and interest, not $4,000 and interest, and she brings error.

Insured's becoming lost was not by design, volition, or intent. It was not an expected or usual incident of hunting. It was unusual and unexpected, fortuitous. He became lost accidentally. * * * His death was caused by accidental exposure to storm and frost. Freezing in and of itself is not an accident. * * * But if joined with a fortuitous, unusual, unexpected circumstance or event, it may constitute an accident. * * * Deceased suffered an accidental death. But it is contended that it was not produced through accidental means, or "through external, violent and accidental means." These words just quoted were before the court in United States 3lut. Accident Ass'n v. Barry, 131 U. S. 100 (9 Sup. Ct. 755), from which we quote:

"The court properly instructed the jury that the term `accidental' was used in the policy in its ordinary, popular sense, as meaning `happening by chance; unexpectedly taking place; not according to the usual course of things; or not as expected;' that, if a result is such as follows from ordinary means, voluntarily employed, in a not unusual or unexpected way, it cannot be called a result effected by accidental means; but, that if, in the act which precedes the in-jury, something unforeseen, unexpected, unusual occurs which produces the injury, then the injury has resulted through accidental means." * * *

The authorities are not in harmony with respect to a distinction between accidental death and death by accidental means. but, con-ceding the distinction, we find no difficulty here under the rule above quoted. The authorities are quite in accord in holding that where one has fallen into water involuntarily and drowned, the death is through external, violent, and accidental means. Water is not an accident. But the fall which preceded the drowning, being unforeseen, unexpected. accidental, the water connected with the fortuitous mishap. the fall, became the accidental means, the instrument of death. So here, insured became lost accidentally, and there-. by suffered accidental and enforced exposure to storm and frost and thereby died. The storm and frost were, in the season of the year and in this latitude, usual incidents of weather. They were

_uoj accidental. * * * But because of insured's accidental exposure to them, the storm and frost so joined with the exposure be-came the accidental means of death. We see no difference in principle where one mistakenly and fortuitously loses his way and falls


Previous Cases on Insurance Law (1931) Next