96 Neb. 130 | Neb. | 1914
This is an action to recover upon an insurance certificate. Plaintiff recovered, and defendant appeals.
Harry F. Ganson, on September 8, 1910, was a dentist, residing in Nebraska 'City, about 44 years of age. He had been married twice. The family consisted of his sec
Notices were printed and distributed along the river and elsewhere. Mrs. Ganson wrote to many of his relatives and old school friends, and caused many inquiries to be made, but neither she nor any one else ever received any communication from him or from any other persons who saw him afterwards.
No evidence was introduced by the defendant. This action was begun about a year after the disappearance. The principle governing this case is well expressed, as follows, by Judge Sanborn in a case from this state, citing Cox v. Ellsworth, 18 Neb. 664, and other cases: “The established presumption of fact from the disappearance of an individual under ordinary circumstances, from whom his relatives and acquaintances have never afterwards heard, is that he continues to live for seven years after his disappearance. If this presumption was unaffected by countervailing facts, it would continue in the case at bar until August 22, 1899; but this presumption of fact is not conclusive. It may be overcome, not only when the testimony of those who saw the insured die or saw his body after his death is produced, or when he was last seen in a peril that might probably cause his death, but also, when all the facts and circumstances of the case — the possible motives, if any, of the lost one to absent and conceal himself in view of approaching failure, disgrace, or punishment, his possible motives, if any, for returning to his family and occupation, his attachments to the members of his family and his friends, his interest and prospects in his business or occupation, and the extent of the unavailing search that has been made for him — are such that they would take the case out of the category of an ordinary disappearance, and would lead the unprejudiced minds of reasonable men, exercising their best judgment, guided by the established rule that life is presumed to continue seven years, after an unexplained disappearance, to the conviction that death had intervened at an earlier date.” Northwestern Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Stevens, 71 Fed. 258. See, also, Winter v.
While there is a possibility that Dr. G-anson may still be alive, we are of the opinion that a consideration of his whole history, his tastes, his habits, his occupation and his manner of life, when taken in connection with the facts that all the clothing which he is known to have been possessed of has been accounted for, that it was not shown that he was in possession of any money at the time of his disappearance, that his last known appearance in life was when he stood unclad upon the bank of the treacherous Missouri river, that what was believed by several witnesses to be the naked body of a human being a few days after-wards was seen in the river at a point below, was sufficient to justify the district court in finding that he died as alleged in the petition. We have been cited in defendant’s brief to numerous instances of the disappearance of persons who were afterward found to be alive, but in none that have been called to our attention are the circumstances similar to those in this case.
The judgment of the district court was warranted by the evidence, and it is therefore
Affirmed.