Equitable Trust Co. of New York v. Early, 181 Ill. App. 447 (1913)

June 24, 1913 · Illinois Appellate Court · Gen. No. 18,095

181 Ill. App. 447

Equitable Trust Company of New York, Plaintiff in Error, v. P. H. Early, Defendant in Error.

Gen. No. 18,095.

Appeals and errors—insurance. The decision in the case is controlled by that in Equitable Trust Co. v. Harger, 177 111. App. 106.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1912.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed June 24, 1913.

Percival Steele,- for plaintiff in error; Harvey L. Cavender, of counsel.

Arthur C. Hoffman, for defendant in error.

Mr. Presiding Justice F. A. Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error brings before us for review a judgment of the Municipal Court of Chicago, in an action of the fourth class in that court brought by the Equitable Trust Company of New York, a corporation, doing a general banking business, against P. H. Early, defendant in error.

The plaintiff’s suit is based upon a written instrument, executed in the State of Illinois, in words and figures as follows; to-wit:

“Chicago, Illinois, January 12, 1903 Mr. Archibald C. Haynes, General Agent, The Equitable Life Assurance Society, No. 25 Broad Street, N. Y.

Dear Sir: I hereby acknowledge having received from Mr. Geo. Schlesinger policy No. 1178284, being for $18,000 on my life in the Equitable Life Assurance Society. You are authorized and requested to place the said policy in force from this date, and I promise to pay the balance of the first annual premium, amounting to $600, as follows:

May 15th, 1903.......................$150

July 15th, 1903....................... 150

Sept. 15th, 1903....................... 150

Nov. 15th, 1903....................... 150

$600

. Very truly yours,

P. H. Early.”

(Endorsed)

“Archibald C. Haynes,

Gen’l Agent,

By E. W. Jones, Atty.”

The trial court found the issues for the defendant and entered judgment against the plaintiff for costs.

The questions presented by the record are precisely the same as those presented in Equitable Trust Co. of New York v. Harger, 177 Ill. App. 106, affirming the judgment below in that case. The Supreme Court has recently, at the term just closed, affirmed the judgment of this court. 258 Ill. 615.

Upon the grounds stated in the Earger case, supra, in our opinion, the court below properly found the issues for defendant.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.