There was error in the refusal of the trial court to allow the motion of the defendant, at the close of all the evidence, for judgment as of nonsuit. All the evidence at the trial shows that the policy sued on was a wagering contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, and for that reason void. The plaintiff had no insurable interest in the life of the insured, Ellen Wilson. Conceding that her testimony was competent as evidence tending to show that Ellen Wilson was the illegitimate daughter of plaintiff’s father, and, therefore, the natural half-sister of the plaintiff, this relationship alone was not sufficient to support the policy as a valid contract. See Rogers v. Insurance Company (S. C.), 133 S. E., 215, 45 A. L. R., 1172, and note.
A policy of insurance on the life of another issued to the beneficiary, who has no insurable interest in the life insured, is void, as against good morals and sound public policy, where the premiums are paid by the beneficiary. Slade v. Ins. Co., 202 N. C., 315, 162 S. E., 734; Hinton v. Ins. Co., 135 N. C., 314, 47 S. E., 474; College v. Ins. Co., 113 N. C.,. 244, 18 S. E., 175. This action should be dismissed. To that end the judgment is
Reversed.