INSURANCE CLAIM

Southland Times, Issue 21732, 18 June 1932, Page 6

INSURANCE CLAIM

JOHNSON CASE THE FINAL STAGES DECISION RESERVED (Per United Press Association.) Wellington, June 17. When the Court resumed to-day in the Johnson insurance case, counsel for the Commercial Union Company began his address. Replying to a question by counsel, his Honour said that in coming to the conclusion that Mrs Johnson’s signature had • been forged, in addition to comparing the writing on the questioned documents with the authentic writing of Mrs Johnson, he had taken other matters into consideration: the evidence relating to the witnessing of the signature and that in regard to the dates on which the documents were said to be signed. He had studied the documents again since the court rose yesterday and was still more firmly of the opinion that the documents were forgeries. His Honour said further that ne could not conceive anyone looking at the documents and comparing them without seeing that the signatures obviously were forged. Frankly, he said he would very much like to come to the other conclusion because one naturally sympathized with the insurance companies when they had paid out, but the view that the documents were forgeries was absolutely forced upon him. While making no suggestion that Mrs Johnson had perjured herself in the witness box, counsel submitted she must have impressed the court as being unreliable in her evidence. Counsel dealt with the question of whether in view of the delay that had been incurred in bringing the action, Mrs Johnson was not stopped'from recovering from the insurance companies and quoted cases in support. Counsel for the T. and G. Society said he did not despair and was not without hope of being able to convince the court that the signature to the document on which the T. and G. Company paid out should be accepted as genuine. If the document on which the company paid out was not proved to be a forgery, then the company must succeed, even though every signature after it might be a forgery. His Honour: I think you are quite right, but the fact that the whole lot of the other documents are forgeries certainly would assist in consideration of vzhether this document is a forgery Counsel went on to refer to the evidence, stressing that Mrs Johnson certainly signed some document in the Bowen Street hospital shortly after the operation and the T. and G. document was dated the day after the operation. Apart from the facts, counsel also dealt with the question of estoppel. Counsel for Plaintiff. Addressing the court cmmsel -for plaintiff said that when the claim was paid by the Temperance and General Assurance Society the relationship between Mr and Mrs Johnson was very strained. Later Johnson feigned a renewal of affection and commenced to bleed her banking account. As his Honour had remarked, it was quite clear that two persons had been concerned in the forgeries and counsel submitted they were Johnson and Goodwin. It was clear Johnson had cleverly worked out a scheme to get his wife’s money. If the Insurance company had carried out its instructions from Melbourne, it would never have paid out on the forged document. The only defence the insurance companies had was that they had made payment. When Mrs Johnson went and told the insurance companies about the forgeries, the companies insisted that the documents upon which they had paid out were genuine. They were content to accept the assurance of Johnson and his solicitor to this effect. No estoppel, he submitted, could arise in the case of fraud. It was absurd for the defendant companies after standing by for two years to now say Mrs Johnson should have gone to them before she knew of the forgeries. When she did tell them they did not believe her. Mrs Johnson could not be blamed for any delay which had taken place. When she came out of hospital she had been driven from pillar to post. It was not until she had got her artificial leg that she could get about and prosecute inquiries. Before paying out the monies the insurance companies should have satisfied themselves '.hat Johnson had his wife’s authority to collect them on her behalf. His Honour: Was not the recipt sufficient? Counsel: No, because the Commercial Union paid out by cheque direct to Johnson personally. His Honour: What is your action for? Counsel: For the insurance policies payable. His Honour: Aren’t we getting perilously near the terms of the convenant in the policy? Decision was reserved.