Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 4.djvu/194

178 and could have done something which he was in the habit of doing before, but he was wholly incapable of doing that which he usually did before. If a man is so incapacitated from following his usual business, occupation, or pursuits as to be unable to do so, he is 'wholly disabled' from following them. His 'usual business and occupation' embrace the whole scope and compass of his mode of getting his livelihood."

The decision was subsequently affirmed by the Exchequer Chamber, 5 H. & N. 556.

This case was followed in Sawyer v. The United States Casualty Company, 8 Am. Law Reg. N. S. 233, decided in i869 in the Superior Court of Massachusetts. The plaintiff, a farmer, was injured by a fall. He was obliged to hire a man to do what he formerly did, although he could still do some light work, such as milking, riding about the farm, and superintending the work. His policy read, "absolutely and totally disable him from the prosecution of his usual employment." The plaintiff recovered, under the following instruction of the court: "The mere fact that a man can- not do a whole day's work, or that by a day's work he cannot accomplish so much as before the accident, is not sufficient to entitle him to recover, but he must satisfy you that for a time, by reason of his accident, he is deprived of the power to do to any extent substantially all the kinds of labor which constituted his usual employment."

In 1877, Lyon v. The Railway Passenger Assurance Company, 46 Ia. 631, was decided. This was a one-day policy, reading, "totally disabled and prevented from the transaction of all kinds of business." The court below said that this language, construed in a practical sense, meant inability to follow any occupation, business, or pursuit, in the usual way, and that the fact that the plain- tiff may do some light parts of the work when he cannot engage in the work itself to any practical extent, will not prevent a recovery. The court reversed this instruction in the following opinion:-

"These instructions are, it seems to us, clearly erroneous. The parties must be bound by the terms of their contract. The contract of insurance provides that the defendant will indemnify the assured against loss of time while totally disabled and prevented from the transaction of all kinds of business solely by reason of bodily injuries effected through outward accidental violence. The fourth instruction