State, Elliott v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Elmer v. (Ariz.) Sweet v. Henderson (Okl.).. 666 891 28 State, Evans v. (Okl. Cr. App.) State, First Nat. Bank v. (Okl.). State, Garrett v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Grader v. (Okl. Cr. App.).. State, Hamilton v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Harris v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Hawkins v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State v. Jefferis (Wyo.). Tann v. Western Pac. R. Co. (Cal. App.).. 971 892 Tavlor. Deasy v. (Cal. App.). 538 892 670 Taylor v. Hammel (Cal. App.). 269 Taylor v. Harkins (Okl.)....... 892 Taylor Mill Co., Salvino v. (Wash.). 892 Temple v. State, two cases (Okl.). Thatcher, Franklin v. (Utah). 547 117 453 113 922 893 909 Thedan, Union Pac. R. Co. v. (Kan.). Thomas v. Fursman (Cal. App.). 441 870 State, Jones v., two cases (Okl. Cr. State, Kansas City Southern R. Co. v. (Okl.) App.) 893 Thomas v. Hacker (Cal.). 855 Thompson v. Clark (Okl.). 655 662 Thompson, Grubbs v. (Okl.). 684 State v. Kuum (Mont.). 288 Thorn v. Dinsmoor (Kan.). 445 State, Kyle v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 893 Thwing Instrument Co., Constantin Refin State v. Lyle (Wash.) 468 ing Co. v. (Okl.).... 111 State v. McNair (Utah). 48 Tibbetts, Safford v. (Kan.). 618 State, Mann v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 894 Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. California State, Marshall v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Mathews v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State, Park v. (Nev.). State, Phillips v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State v. Reno Brewing Co. (Nev.). State, Rhoades v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State v. Roberts (Idaho).. 832 Travelers' Ins. Co., Upton v. (Cal.). 902 Traylor v. Rogers (Kan.). 851 .. 416 895 Trego County State Bank v. Hillman 80 (Kan.) 420 State, Robnett v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 890 Tubby v. State (Okl. Cr. App.). 491 State, Southerland v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State v. Superior Court for King County (Wash.) 698 Twitchell, Santa Barbara County v. (Cal.) 945 Tyrell v. Leege (Wash.).. 467 827 Tyren, People v. (Cal.). 132 State, Temple v., two cases (Okl.). State, Tubby v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 113 State v. Vane (Wash.).. 456 Union Cent. Life Ins. Co., Mathews v. State, Venters v. (Okl. Cr. App.). State v. Warner (Or.).. State, Wilkerson v. (Okl. Cr. App.) 977 221 Union Colonization Co. v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co. (Cal.).. 957 (Okl.) 981 Union Nat. Bank v. Leidecker Tool Co. 895 690 State v. Williford (Kan.).. State, Wilson v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 895 Union Nat. Bank, Neil v. (Okl.). 612 Union Pac. R. Co. v. Larson (Colo.). 490 Union Pac. R. Co. v. Thedan (Kan.). 659 573 441 State, Zackie v. (Okl. Cr. App.). 271 State Nat. Bank v. Board of Com'rs of United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Superior Court of San Diego County (Cal.) 143 Stephenson, Kohler v. (Cal. App.). 970 Stevens v. Chisholm (Cal.).. 128 United Water, Gas & Electric Co., Coberly v. (Kan.). 393 221 Warwick, State v. (Wash.). 977 477 687 Victoria Park Co. v. Continental Ins. Co. of New York (Cal. App.).. Vieux, Rockey v. (Cal.). Wade v. Wade (Or.)..... Wagler v. Tobin (Kan.). Wall v. McEnnery's Estate (Wash.). Wall, Van Cott v. (Utah). Warner, State v. (Or.).. Warren, Raisch v. (Cal. App.). Watson v. Barnard (Wash.). Weeks, Saar v. (Wash.). Wegener v. Peterson (Wash.). Welch, Dillingham v. (Cal.). Welk v. Sorenson (Cal.) 724 Winnemucca State Bank & Trust Co. v. Corbeil (Nev.).... 463 Wilson, Foote v. (Kan.). 430 Wilson v. State (Okl. Cr. App.). 490 23 825 Winslow v. McCarthy, two cases (Cal. 720 801 314 42 631 Woodside, Union State Bank v. (Okl.). 109 Word v. Nakdimen (Okl.).. 257 Yoakum Co., Schmidt v. (Cal. App.). 318 516 Yoder v. Yoder (Wash.).. 474 512 Yokom, Connecticut Inv. Co. v. (Wash.)... 628 498 Youtz, Merchants' & Insurers' Reporting Weller, Ex parte (Ariz.). 981 Co. v. (Cal. App.)... 540 Weller, State v. (Ariz.). 981 Yuma Gas, Light & Water Co. v. Yuma (Ariz.) 26 Wessinger, Blair v. (Cal. App.). 545 West v. Springfield Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (Kan.) Western Pac. R. Co., Tann v. (Cal. App.).. 971 Zwissig, Ex parte (Nev.) 20 REHEARINGS DENIED [Cases in which rehearings have been denied, without the rendition of a written opinion, since the publication of the original opinions in previous volumes of this Reporter.] IDAHO. Donovan v. Dougherty, 174 P. 701. OKLAHOMA. Armstrong v. Poland, 156 P. 220. Gaffney v. Royal Neighbors of America, 174 P. City of Chickasha v. Hollingsworth, 155 P. 859. 1014. Nicholson v. Smith, 174 P. 1008. Tyson Creek R. Co. v. Empire Mill Co., 174 Wallace v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 174 P. 1009. ΜΟΝΤΑΝΑ. Deep Red Oil Co. v. Owen, 155 P. 874. Meck v. Eggerman, 155 P. 522. Navarre v. Finerty, 154 P. 1143. Second petition. OREGON. Boulevard Drainage Dist. v. Gordon, 177 P. 956. State v. Chin Borkey, 176 P. 195. Markinovich v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 174 P. State v. Ching Lem, 176 P. 590. 183. Stillwell v. Rankin, 174 P. 186. State v. Chin Ping, 176 P. 188. See End of Index for Tables of Pacific Cases in State Reports (xv)† THE PACIFIC REPORTER VOLUME 178 ARMSTRONG et al. v. MODERN WOOD- 6. EVIDENCE 295-ADMISSIBILITY-MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE. In an action on a fraternal benefit certificate, on the issue whether insured was born in (Supreme Court of Washington. Jan. 17, 1919.) 1858 instead of in 1862, as his application re cited, evidence by insured's son that before the 1. EVIDENCE 383(3)— RECITAL IN MAR- application for membership was made his father BIAGE LICENSE-CONCLUSIVENESS. stated he was born in 1862 was admissible. In an action on a fraternal benefit certificate, on the issue whether insured was born in 1858 instead of in 1862, as his application stated a recital in a marriage license, issued to insured in 1882, that he was then over the age of 21, was not conclusive. 2. APPEAL AND ERROR QUESTIONS OF FACT. 7. TRIAL 139(1) — QUESTION FOR JURYSHIFT IN BURDEN OF PROOF-PRIMA FACIE CASE. In action on life policy in which recovery was resisted for false representations as to age, proof of death reciting date of birth earlier than represented, though making a prima facie case, 1005(4)—REVIEW- did not shift burden of proof so as to authorize instruction for defendant. The Supreme Court will not disturb a verdict approved by the trial court, though it may believe the weight of evidence is against the verdict. Chadwick, C. J., dissenting. Department 1. Appeal from Superior Court, Whitman 3. EVIDENCE ←215(1)—ADMISSION AGAINST County; R. L. McCroskey, Judge. INTEREST-CONTRACT. Action by William R. Armstrong and others against the Modern Woodmen of America. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed. In an action on a fraternal benefit certificate, on the issue whether insured was born in 1858 instead of in 1862, as his application recited, agreement dated 1880, whereby insured's father transferred property to insured in consideration of support by insured during father's Arthur W. Davis and Charles M. Chamberlifetime, was not competent evidence of insur-lin, both of Spokane, and Truman Plantz, of ed's age, as an admission against interest. 4. EVIDENCE 54, 56-PRESUMPTIONS BASED ON PRESUMPTION-CAPACITY TO CONTRACT. In action on fraternal benefit certificate, on the issue whether insured was born in 1858 instead of 1862, as his application recited, an agreement, dated 1880, whereby insured's father transferred property to insured in consideration of insured's support of the father during life, was not rendered competent evidence as raising a presumption as to insured's age by reason of the presumption that the maker of a contract is competent to bind himself. 5. APPEAL AND ERROR HARMLESS ERROR. 1058(2)-REVIEW In an action on a benefit certificate, where a witness was not permitted to give testimony as to what his deceased wife told him as to the date of her birth, but was permitted to testify as to her age from his own knowledge, which evidence was consistent with appellant's contentions, appellant cannot object to such ruling; he not having been injured. Warsaw, Ill., for appellant. John Pattison and J. P. Burson, both of Spokane, for respondents. TOLMAN, J. This action was brought to recover upon a benefit certificate issued by appellant Modern Woodmen of America, in 1903, to George E. Armstrong, who in his application for membership stated, that he was born on the 10th day of July, 1862. George E. Armstrong died on the 11th day of February, 1913, and proof of his death was submitted, in which it appeared that Armstrong was born on the 10th day of July, 1858. Payment was refused because of alleged misrepresentation of the age of deceased, and that fact was pleaded as a defense to the action. Trial was had to a jury, which found a verdict in favor of respondents for the full amount of the benefit certificate, and interest. A motion for new trial and a motion for judgment non obstante veredicto were interposed. For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes |