Branham v. Capital Life & Health Ins. Co.

I concur in the opinion of the Chief Justice in this case because I think that the policy is reasonably susceptible of the construction that it covered the hospitalization for *79which the insured made claim, and on account of which the company wrongfully undertook to cancel the policy. Ambiguous policy provisions should be construed in favor of the insured. Cullum v. New York L. Ins. Co., 197 S. C. 6, 14 S. E. (2d) 361, 135 A. L. R. 867; Harwell v. Mutual Benefit H. & A. Ass’n, 207 S. C. 150, 35 S. E. (2d) 160, 161 A. L. R. 183. The patent ambiguities in the policy provisions made admissible in…