{ "id": 3145190, "name": "Aurelia Wyckoff, Appellee, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant", "name_abbreviation": "Wyckoff v. Metropolitan Life Insurance", "decision_date": "1939-11-08", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "241", "last_page": "246", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "302 Ill. App. 241" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.", "id": 8837, "name": "Illinois Appellate Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "294 Ill. App. 324", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App.", "case_ids": [ 3239350 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app/294/0324-01" ] }, { "cite": "277 Ill. App. 366", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App.", "case_ids": [ 5550410 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app/277/0366-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 449, "char_count": 8545, "ocr_confidence": 0.551, "pagerank": { "raw": 6.309085738289258e-08, "percentile": 0.38816490845605284 }, "sha256": "4f42ad2f6a8521e0e61a58faeb90de2d12dd729359c0911f8d9bc8c8b3a4ea34", "simhash": "1:b677c3c40b4db767", "word_count": 1469 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:44:57.852020+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "Aurelia Wyckoff, Appellee, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Stone\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis is an appeal from judgment of the city court of the city of East St. Louis. The case was tried before the court without a jury and judgment was rendered for plaintiff in the sum of $147.99.\nAppellee brought suit herein for monthly disability benefits claimed to be due under the terms and provisions of a group life insurance policy and certificate issued thereunder by appellant company upon employees of Armour & Company. \u00a1\nThe appellee was 34 years of age, has been married for 11 years and had no children. She was employed by Armour & Company in its St. Louis plant since February, 1934, where she was steadily engaged in tying sausage into bundles. Early in November, 1937, appellee became ill and placed herself under treatment of Dr. Bihss of East St. Louis, where she resided, and on November 10 she became sick and quit work. At the time of her first call to Dr. Bihss she was complaining of coughing, loss of weight and feeling tired in the afternoon. Dr. Bihss examined her with a stethoscope and suspected that she had crepitant rales in the right upper lobe and determined that she had minimal pulmonary tuberculosis in the right upper lobe. Dr. Bihss ordered the appellee to bed, put her on a high caloric diet and high vitamin diet, ordered her to rest and did not allow her to do any housework at all for at least three months.\nThe pertinent portions of the insurance contract under which appellee seeks to recover provide for specific benefits \u201cin the case of any Employee who furnishes due proof to the Company, that, while insured thereunder and prior to his 60th birthday, he has become totally and permanently disabled, as a result of bodily injury or disease, so as to be prevented thereby from engaging in any occupation and performing any work for wage or profit. \u2019 \u2019\n\u201cSix months after receipt of such proof, the Company shall commence to pay to such Employee or, in case of insanity, as provided in said Group Life policy, in lieu of the payment of the insurance under the said Group Life policy at his death, equal instalments depending upon the amount of insurance in force on the life of such Employee at the date of receipt of such proof or at the date of termination of the insurance, if proof be received later, as shown in the following table:\u201d\nThe contract further provides: \u201cSuch instalment payments shall be made only during the continuance of such disability,\u201d and that \u201cin the event of the recovery of the Employee from such disability before all instalments have been paid, further payments shall cease.\u201d\nThe evidence shows that appellee became sick and quit work on November 10, 1937. She stated to her doctor at that time that she was weak and lost weight, that her weight previously was 156 pounds and now was 127 pounds. She testified she ran a temperature of 99.2 and after November, 1937, was confined to bed for about three months. She further stated that she could not do the kind of work at the time of trial that she did at the time she got the insurance policy. She also stated th\u00e1t at times she spits blood, that the first two months, starting the 10th of November, 1937, she was in bed but since that time has been up and down. The evidence further shows that appellee\u2019s physician, Dr. Bihss, made two tuberculin tests, the last being in May, 1938, and that each of these tests showed positive. Her doctor further testified that he had treated her constantly since her visit to his office, that he had her X-rayed on March 6, 1938, and that the X-ray examination disclosed no evidence of any present pathology, and that any abnormalcy had disappeared. He again had X-rays taken in May, 1938, which disclosed no active tuberculosis. He did, however, continue to treat her with the rest cure at home; that it was his opinion that the appellee at the time of trial had tuberculosis of an arrested type. He stated, however, that she was not well enough to do her regular household duties or factory work at the time of trial, but that he was permitting her to do light housework and that she was getting better and that in all probability she would be completely cured within five or six months.\nThere appears to be no question from the record that sometime during her life appellee had tuberculosis, and from the testimony of her physician, Dr. Bihss, who attended her constantly and had adequate opportunity to examine her, she had minimal pulmonary tuberculosis in November, 1937, and was totally disabled for a period of approximately three months, being confined in bed under the rest cure prescribed by Dr. Bihss.\nBy the terms of the policy it was incumbent upon the appellee to allege and prove that she was \u201ctotally and permanently disabled.\u201d Furthermore, the policy provided that \u201csix months after such proof, the company shall commence to pay.\u201d The certificate also provided that the monthly benefits \u201cshall be made only during the continuance of such disability and that in the event of recovery from such disability before all instalments have been paid, further payments should cease.\u201d\nFrom the evidence it appears, clear enough, that the appellee was totally disabled for at least three months, but the question whether she was also permanently disabled is another matter. Her own doctor on March 23, 1938, at her request, sent in a report to the defendant that the insured \u201cwas not at that time still unable to engage in work, occupation or business,\u201d and on cross-examination, that by \u201cnot wholly not able to work\u201d he meant \u201cshe was able to do light housework.\u201d On May 31, 1938, appellee\u2019s physician reported to defendant, on her behalf, that the disease was not active at that time.\nAs stated above, her own doctor was in a position to observe and watch the plaintiff\u2019s progress. He stated that he considered it perfectly all right for plaintiff in her condition to do light work around the house, and that by light work he meant light housework. He further stated that there were no active tuberculosis lesions, and in view of plaintiff\u2019s progress that in a period not to exceed five months she would be perfectly normal in all respects. The appellee\u2019s doctor\u2019s opinion as to her progress toward recovery was substantiated by the testimony of Dr. Ellis, the doctor for Armour & Company and appellant, who examined appellee in May and September, and just before trial, with stethoscope and by X-ray diagnosis which showed no evidence of tuberculosis. In view of the plaintiff\u2019s own doctor\u2019s testimony, substantiated by the testimony of Dr. Ellis and that of the various X-ray diagnoses made, we are unable to agree that the plaintiff\u2019s ailment was permanent within the meaning of the contract.\nFrom the record it appears that the plaintiff\u2019s doctor was of the opinion that the tuberculosis was arrested and plaintiff was on the road to recovery, as indicated in his report to the defendant in March, 1938. Furthermore, it appears that in March, May and July of 1938, the plaintiff\u2019s doctor reported to the defendant that there was no evidence of tuberculosis and further reported on at least one occasion that the plaintiff was not totally disabled.\nIt has been held in Buffo v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 277 Ill. App. 366, that the policy under consideration is a total disability policy as applied to all kinds of endeavor and is not an occupational policy. We are of the opinion that the ruling in the Bu,ffo case is correct and that the plaintiff\u2019s ability in this case to perform light housekeeping within the six-month \u201cwaiting period\u201d as set forth in the insurance contract would preclude her from claiming total disability thereunder.\nIt is appellee\u2019s contention that Ginsburg v. Prudential Ins. Co., 294 Ill. App. 324, is controlling in this case. This we cannot agree, as it appears in the Ginsburg case that no recovery was allowed after the insured was able to resume work even though for an hour or two each day. In the instant case the appellee was able and was permitted by her doctor to engage in light housework during the six-month period of waifi ing, as provided by the contract after first proofs of claim were submitted to the defendant.\nJudgment of the city court of Bast St. Louis is reversed.\nReversed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Stone" } ], "attorneys": [ "Kramer, Campbell, Costello & Weichert and Norman J. Gundlach, all of East St. Louis, for appellant.", "Whitnel, Browning, Listeman & Walker, of East St. Louis, for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "Aurelia Wyckoff, Appellee, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant.\nOpinion filed November 8, 1939.\nKramer, Campbell, Costello & Weichert and Norman J. Gundlach, all of East St. Louis, for appellant.\nWhitnel, Browning, Listeman & Walker, of East St. Louis, for appellee." }, "file_name": "0241-01", "first_page_order": 267, "last_page_order": 272 }