Printable Format

Previous | Next

Revisor's Note:

Later act, see 40-2203.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Restricting clause not complying with section, policy construed without it. Stewart v. Mutual Benefit Health and Acc. Ass'n, 135 Kan. 138, 141, 9 P.2d 977.

2. "Exception" in first paragraph held to mean definition of loss. Noel v. Continental Casualty Co., 138 Kan. 136, 141, 23 P.2d 610.

3. False statement in application omitting sinus trouble bars recovery. Giacoma v. Bankers Indemnity Ins. Co., 138 Kan. 226, 228, 25 P.2d 362.

4. Paragraph (m) applied; right of carrier to bring independent action in district court denied. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. Matlock, 151 Kan. 293, 297, 98 P.2d 456.

5. Proviso of clause (a)(6) inapplicable to policy provision merely setting out risks covered. Hildebrand v. Washington National Ins. Co., 155 Kan. 220, 221, 222, 124 P.2d 510.

6. Policy violating ¶ (a) cl. (6) construed as if exception not in policy. Owen v. Mutual Benefit Health & Acc. Ass'n, 166 Kan. 525, 526, 203 P.2d 196.

7. Words limiting benefits printed in smaller type disregarded; statute applied. See v. United Ins. Co., 171 Kan. 146, 149, 150, 230 P.2d 1008.

8. Provisions of ¶ (a) subdivision (6) and ¶ (i) as construed held constitutional. Owen v. Mutual Benefit Health & Acc. Ass'n, 171 Kan. 457, 458, 459, 233 P.2d 706.

9. Section held inapplicable to automobile accident insurance policies. Saul v. Saint Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co., 173 Kan. 679, 685, 250 P.2d 819.

10. Paragraph (m) mentioned; unqualified insurance agent held not insurer. King v. El Dorado Motor Co., 181 Kan. 477, 480, 311 P.2d 999.