{
  "id": 2926706,
  "name": "Retta T. Kevan, Plaintiff in Error, v. National Life Insurance Company of the United States of America, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Kevan v. National Life Insurance Co. of United States",
  "decision_date": "1917-10-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,086",
  "first_page": "341",
  "last_page": "342",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 341"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 185,
    "char_count": 2764,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.582,
    "sha256": "ba61e3176e22a9b2f0450ddce892223b0c378ebdded59a6814ac61cea12017e3",
    "simhash": "1:b256e21d7e8dfcca",
    "word_count": 466
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Retta T. Kevan, Plaintiff in Error, v. National Life Insurance Company of the United States of America, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Worth Allen, for plaintiff in error.",
      "L. A. Stebbins, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Retta T. Kevan, Plaintiff in Error, v. National Life Insurance Company of the United States of America, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 23,086.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Foeix, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the Miarch term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 2, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by Eetta T. Kevan, complainant, against National Life Insurance Company of the United States of America, defendant, asking that a release signed by complainant releasing defendant from liability on a policy of insurance on the life of complainant\u2019s husband in consideration of the refund of the last premium paid, after default in payment, be canceled and defendant be required to pay the amount of the policy. From a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, complainant brings error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Insurance, \u00a7 378 \u2014 when evidence insufficient.to show extension of time for payment of last premium. On a bill by a beneficiary in a life insurance policy to set aside a release given by complainant releasing defendant from liability on a policy on the life of complainant\u2019s husband, and to compel the payment of the amount of the policy, evidence held, insufficient to show an extension of time for the payment of the last premium.\n2. Release, \u00a7 8* \u2014 when release of insurance company from liability is valid. Where there is a disagreement between the beneficiary in a life insurance policy and the insurer as to whether an oral agreement was made between complainant and one of defendant\u2019s employees for an extension of time for the payment of the last premium, a release of the company from liability executed in consideration of the repayment of a previous premium is valid, in the absence of fraud or misrepresentation.\n3. Equity, \u00a7 345* \u2014 when findings of fact in decree are unnecessary. Findings of fact in a decree dismissing a bill for want of equity are unessential and superfluous, since a decree for the defendant needs no evidence to support it and it is supported by the absence or insufficiency of evidence.\n4. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1175* \u2014 what is not subject of review on appeal from decree dismissing bill for want of equity. Argument and remarks of counsel are not proper subjects for review on appeal from a decree dismissing a bill for want of equity, as the only question for review is the propriety of the order dismissing the bill, considered upon the evidence presented and the rules of- law applicable thereto.\nWorth Allen, for plaintiff in error.\nL. A. Stebbins, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0341-01",
  "first_page_order": 367,
  "last_page_order": 368
}