Overton v. St. Louis Mutual Life Insurance
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. The court erred in giving the respondent’s instructions. As a deduction of law it is objectionable, because it assumes the very point in. issue, viz., that deceased shot at Williams in the “lawful” defence of his person. What is “.lawful” self-defence ? This is the very question to be determined by the facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. The court erred in giving the respondent’s instructions. As a deduction of law it is objectionable, because it assumes the very point in. issue, viz., that deceased shot at Williams in the “lawful” defence of his person. What is “.lawful” self-defence ? This is the very question to be determined by the facts. If the court had found the facts as they are indisputably proved by all the witnesses, it would appear that deceased provoked a quarrel by false and dishonorable accusations, and continues in the quarrel, and then shoots in “ lawful defence…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
This was an action to recover the amount of. a policy of insurance issued by the appellant on the life of Dudley H. Overton, late husband of the respondent. The policy contained this clause, “that in case the said Dudley H. Overton *124should die in the known violation of any law of this State or of the United States, or of any government where he may be, this policy shall be void, null, and of no effect.”
The sole question in controversy is as to whether Overton came to his death under circumstances which worked a forfeiture of the policy on his life within the provisions of the foregoing clause.
T…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Bradley v. . the Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- McKeon v. National Casualty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1925
- Supreme Lodge of Knights v. BradleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Railway Mail Ass'n v. MoseleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Wolff v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.