Brandt v. Mutual Ben. Health & Acc. Ass'n

Complainant brought this suit to recover the indemnity for “confining illness” under a health and *16accident policy issued to liim by defendant. Tbe canse was tried before tbe Chancellor and a jury. Complainant’s proof consisted of bis testimony and tbe deposition of bis physician. Defendant offered no proof. Tbe Chancellor discharged the jury and decreed complainant a recovery of $150, tbe maximum provided by tbe policy for ‘ ‘ nonconfining illness. ’ ’

Complainant appealed in error and insists that tbe Chancellor should have allowed him a recovery at tbe rate of $100 per month for “confining…