METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO. v. RICHTER

METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO. v. RICHTER
1937 OK 681
78 P.2d 310
182 Okla. 448
Case Number: 27587
Decided: 11/23/1937
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO.
v.
RICHTER

Syllabus

¶0 1. INSURANCE - Accident Policy Providing for Weekly Benefits - Whether Disability Direct and Independent Result of Accidental Injury as Question of Fact for Jury.
In an action on an insurance policy which provides for weekly benefits when the insured as a direct and independent result of an accidental injury, is continuously and wholly disabled and prevented from performing any and every kind of duty pertaining to his occupation, the question of whether or not a disability is the direct and independent result of an accidental injury is a question of fact, and the verdict of the jury thereon will not be disturbed by this court when there is competent evidence in the record reasonably tending to support the verdict and the finding of the jury.
2. APPEAL AND ERROR - TRIAL - Discretion of Court in Consolidating Cases for Trial.
The trial court has a wide discretion in consolidating cases for trial, especially where the parties and the subject matter are the same, and the questions of fact and law are substantially the same, and such action of the trial court will not be disturbed where an abuse of discretion is not shown.

Appeal from District Court, Okmulgee County; S.L. O'Bannon, Judge.

Action by Richard E. Richter against the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to recover certain installment benefits provided in an accident insurance policy. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Williams & French, for plaintiff in error.
E.F. Maley, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 This is a companion appeal to the case of Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Richard E. Richter, 182 Okla. 446, 78 P.2d 307, this day decided. The parties and the subject matter are the same and the contentions of the plaintiff in error are the same as those which were presented in the above case and decided therein adversely to the plaintiff in error, and what has therein been said applies to the record here. There is no error of law or fact presented.

¶2 The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.