Insurance — Health and accident insurance — Inducing words in endorsement — "Paycheck-Plus" — Application asking insured his monthly earnings — Liability of insurer for wages lost by plaintiff.
In an action by the insured on a policy of insurance entitled "Comprehensive Health Protection Policy", which insured against loss resulting from accidental bodily injury, in which it appeared that at the top of an endorsement to the policy, on the schedule of benefits, there was a heading in bold letters, "`Paycheck-Plus' Sickness And Accident Benefit Endorsement", and that in the application, which was attached to the policy, the insured was asked his monthly earnings; that the insurer stated that it had used the word "Paycheck" without purpose, that it was meaningless, and that the insurer was not liable to plaintiff for wages lost while he was out of work due to a covered injury; and that the court below, giving due weight to the words, "Paycheck-Plus", in the heading in the endorsement, and to the application, concluded that plaintiff was entitled to his "Paycheck", that is, his wages for the time he was out of work, and sustained the decision of the trial judge in favor of plaintiff; it was Held that the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.
MONTGOMERY, J., dissented.
Argued December 17, 1965.
OPINION PER CURIAM, February 1, 1966:
The judgment of Common Pleas Court No. 6 of Philadelphia County is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge JOSEPH SLOANE for the court below, reported at 38 Pa. D. C. 2d 401.
MONTGOMERY, J., dissents.