other accidental means. Bohaker v. Travelers' Ins. Co., 215 Mass. 32, 102 N. E. 342, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 543. If there is no active disease, but merely a frail general condition, so that powers of resistance are easily overcome, or merely a tendency to disease which is started up and made operative, whereby death results, then there may be recovery even though the accident would not have caused that effect upon a healthy person in a normal state. Cheswell v. Fraternal Accident Ass'n, 199 Mass. 267, 85 N. E. 96; Collins v. Casualty Co. of America, 224 Mass. 327, 112 N. E. 634, L. R. A. 1916E, 1203. The inevitable result is that under this statement of the law the plaintiff cannot recover upon these facts. The deceased confessedly was suffering from disease or diseases which actively co-operated with the fall in casuing death. The disease and the fall were concurring, efficient and proximate causes in producing the death. Either alone without the other would not then have resulted fatally. It cannot be held with any due regard to the meaning of words in the contract here sued upon, that the death of the insured resulted from the accident "alone and independent of all other causes" as "the proximate, sole and only cause." [5] The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to show that the death resulted from one or more of the causes enumerated by the terms of the contract as establishing the liability of the defendant. Smith v. Travelers' Ins. Co., 219 Mass. 147, 150, 106 N. E. 607, L. R. A. 1915B, 872. As matter of law she has failed to sustain that burden for the reasons stated. It becomes unnecessary to consider the other questions raised. Exceptions overruled. Judgment on the verdict. CASUALTY, SURETY AND MISCELLANEOUS. STATE EX REL. ELBERTA PEACH & LAND CO. v. CHICAGO BONDING & SURETY CO. (Nos. 20166, 20169.)* (Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.) 8. INSURANCE-FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY "INSURER," WITHIN PROVISIONS OF STATUTE AS TO VEXATIOUS DEFENSES. A fidelity insurance company, which became surety on the bond of a receiver, is an insurer, within Rev. St. 1909, § 7068, as amended by Laws 1911, p. 282, declaring that in every action against any insurance company, if such company has vexatiously refused to pay the loss, the court may allow damages and reasonable attorney's fees, etc. (For other cases, see Insurance, Dec. Dig. § 602.) (For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, Insurer.) 9. INSURANCE-RECEIVER'S BOND INSURANCE "POLICY”. WITHIN STATUTE PENALIZING REFUSAL TO PAY. A judicial bond, such as a receiver's bond signed by a commercial surety company, which was engaged generally in the fidelity business, is an insurance "policy," within Rev. St. 1909, § 7068, as amended by Laws 1911, p. 282, declaring that, in any action against any insurance company to recover the amount of any policy, damages and attorney's fees may be allowed for vexatious refusal to pay. (For other cases, see Insurance, Dec. Dig. § 602.) (For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Policy.) Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; William T. Jones, Judge. Action by the State, on the relation and to the use of the Elberta Peach & Land Company, against the Chicago Bonding & Surety Company. From a judgment granting plaintiff part of the relief sought, defendant appeals, and plaintiff also appeals. Affirmed on defendant's appeal; and on plaintiff's, reversed and remanded, with directions. Luther Ely Smith, of St. Louis, for relator. Holland, Rutledge & Lashly, of St. Louis, for defendant. *Decision rendered, Sept. 27, 1919. 215 S. W. Rep. 20. Rehearing Denied Oct. 10, 1919. CONTINENTAL PAPER BAG CO. et al. v. BOSWORTH. (No. 7762.)* (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Galveston.) 2. INSURANCE-JUDGMENT AGAINST INSURER REFUSING TO DEFEND IN ACTION AGAINST INSURED. Where liability indemnity policy required insurer to defend suit against insured and provided that no action could be brought on the policy until after judgment has been rendered against insured, insurer, after being impleaded in suit against insured upon its denial of liability and refusal to defend, could be held liable in such suit upon judgment being rendered against insured. (For other cases, see Insurance, Dec. Dig. § 514.) 3. INSURANCE-LIABILITY POLICY FOR INJURIES IN STORE AND WAREHOUSE CONSTRUED . Liability policy agreeing to indemnify insured, dealers in paper bags, against loss from liability for injuries sustained within premises designated as "store and warehouse" in which insured was to conduct no business "except as store and warehouse," held to cover accident to operator of printing press upon the premises, where the printing of bags and paper was a necessary part of the business of the store and warehouse of insured. (For other cases, see Insurance, Dec. Dig. § 157.) Appeal from District Court, Harris County; J. D. Harvey, Judge. Suit by Carrie Bosworth against the Continental Paper Bag Company, in which the Western Indemnity Company and the Fidelity & Casualty Company were impleaded. From judgment rendered, the defendant and the Fidelity & Casualty Company appeal. Affirmed. Baker, Botts, Parker & Garwood, R. C. Patterson, and Guy Graham all of Houston, for appellant. Presley K. Ewing, of Houston, for appellee. *Decision rendered, July 3, 1919. S. W. Rep. 126. Rehearing Denied Oct. 9, 1919. 215 From July to December, 1919, inclusive. Aaberg v. Minnesota Commercial Men's Ass'n (Minn. S. C.). Adams v. Police & Firemen's Ins. Ass'n, et al. (Neb. S. C.) Agricultural Ins. Co. of New York v. Anderson (Miss. S. C.). Allemania Fire Ins. Co. v. Angier (Tex. C. C. A.). Alliance Hail Ass'n of North Dokota v. Lynch (N. D. S. C.) Allman v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America (Mo. American Casualty Co. v. Roehm (Ohio S. C.) American Fire Ins. Co. v. King Lumber & Mfg. Co. (U.S. S. C.) American Nat. Ins. Co. et al. v. Wallace et al. (Tex. C. C. A.). Antrim v. Telegraphers' Benev. Ass'n (N. J. C. E. A.). Automobile Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., v. Barondess (N. Y. S C.).. 478 Beland v. Cigarmakers' International Union of America (Mich. S. C.) 163 Berry v. National Council of Knights and Ladies of Security. (Wash. 424 Bradbury v. Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 330 Commercial Union Assur. Co., Ltd., v. Winstead (Tex. C. C. A.).. 457 453 658 Cooper et al. v. New York Life Ins. Co. (Mo. S. C.) Crews v. Illinois Commercial Men's Ass'n (U. S. D. C.) Dabney v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co. (Kan. S. C.) Dalton v. Norwich Union Fire Ins. Soc. (Tex. Com. A.) Dessauer v. Supreme Tent, Knights of the Maccabees of the World. 53 Dixie Fire Ins. Co. v. Hillsborough Dry Goods Co. (Fla. S. C.).. Dolnak v. Sons and Daughters of Justice et al. (Kan. S. C.).... 286 Dunn et al. v. Physicians' Casualty Ass'n of America (Neb. S. C.).. 481 Edwards v. Heralds of Liberty (Pa. S. C.)..... Elberta Peach & Land Co., [State ex rel.], v. Chicago Bonding & Emerson v. Western Automobile Indemnity Ass'n (Kan. S. C.) Employers' Liability Assur. Corporation v. Roehm (Ohio S. C.)... Exchange Bank of Bloomfield v. Illinois Life Ins. Co. (Iowa S. C.) Fanning v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U. S. (Pa. S. C.). 536 Farmer, G. P. Coal & Supply Co. et al. v. Albright et al. (N. J. C. Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia v. Strayhorn (Tex. Com. A.). Forcht v. North American Life Casualty Co. (S. D. S. C.) Franklin State Bank v. Maryland Casualty Co. (U. S. C. C. A.) Franklin State Bank v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (U Georgia Casualty Co. v. Schrepferman (Ind. A. C.).. Gillard v. Manufacturers' Casualty Ins. Co. (N. J. C. E. A.) Gillard v. Manufacturers' Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, Pa. (N. J. Gould v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United States (N. Y. S. C.).. 408 Hanna v. Interstate Business Men's Men's Acc. Ass'n of Des Moines, 469 Hanson v. Royal Ins. Co. (U. S. C. C. A.) 426 Hardy v. Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of The World (Ala. C. A.) . 156 Harris v. Michigan Mut. Hail Ins. Co. (Mich. S. C.). 455 Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Davis (Ky. C. A.) 101 Hinkson v. Kansas City Life Ins. Co. (Ore. S. C.).. 521 Hoagland Wagon Co. v. London Guarantee & Accident Co. (Kan. 376 Hobson v. Wise County Home Protective Ass'n (Tex. C. C. A.).... 543 62 |