holding that policy holder failed to give reasonable notice to the insurer of a claim against him as a matter of law where he waited thirty- two days to give notice because the insured did not testify and there was no evidence he was unable to give notice due to physical or mental disability
How later courts described this case
- holding that policy holder failed to give reasonable notice to the insurer of a claim against him as a matter of law where he waited thirty- two days to give notice because the insured did not testify and there was no evidence he was unable to give notice due to physical or mental disability
- holding that, as a matter of law, a thirty-two-day delay in notice was not "as soon as practicable”
- delay of 32 days in notifying insured of an automobile accident was not "as soon as practicable” as a matter of law
- "It should be kept in mind that this is a suit on an insurance policy executed to [the insured] and that it can benefit petitioners only to the degree which it affords protection to [the insured]."
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Mr. Justice Wilson
concurring in the result.
I agree with the result of the majority, but concur with the dissent that the failure to furnish the citation in the first suit should not bar recovery if properly raised. However, I do not believe that an assignment of failure of co-operation brings forward the error below in holding that the claimant failed to forward the citation since these are listed separately in the policy.
Opinion delivered January 12, 1955.
Rehearing overruled February 23, 1955.