Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 4.djvu/192

176 176 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. TOTAL DISABILITY IN ACCIDENT INSURANCE. THE holder of an accident insurance policy is insured, so runs the policy of the day, ** against loss of time not exceeding twenty-six weeks resulting from bodily injuries effected through external, violent, and accidental means which shall, independently of all other causes, immediately and wholly disable and prevent him from the prosecution of any and every kind of business per- taining to his occupation." In what cases will the courts rule that he is totally disabled within the meaning of this policy? Do these words mean that to recover he must be so disabled as to be prevented from doing any- thing whatsoever pertaining to his occupation, or any part of his business pertaining to his occupatipn, or must he be so disabled as to be prevented from doing any and every kind of business per- taining to his occupation? In other words, is there a difference in being able to perform any part of one's business, and any and every kind of business pertaining to one's occupation? For instance, suppose that the insured was a billiard-saloon keeper, that he could do some of the acts necessary to be done in the business of billiard-saloon keeper, but was wholly disabled from doing many of the material acts necessary to be done in that business. Is such a man "totally disabled" within the meaning of the policy as interpreted by the courts? Or, again, suppose the case of a merchant grocer seriously in- jured in his foot, who after a few days of confinement in the house was able with great exertion to get into his buggy and superintend a small part of his business, though for the whole period of twenty-six weeks he was unable to do substantially all kinds of his accustomed labor to some extent. Can he recover under such a poHcy? As the great majority of accidents do not incapacitate a man from all labor whatsoever, but often leave him in a condition to perform some work, though it may be a very small part of his regular duties, it is a question of importance whether under such