Snodgrass

This is an appeal from a judgment on a verdict in favor of the government on a policy of war risk insurance. The sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is not questioned. The assignments of error challenge (1) the ruling of the court in refusing to allow in evidence Regulation 11 of the Bureau of War Risk Insurance, defining the term total and permanent disability, and (2) the refusal of the court to give certain requested instructions.

*100 In United States v. Lawson (C. C. A.) 50 F.(2d) 646 , the government assigned as error the admission in evidence of Regulation 11, contending that it should not have been read to the jury, because, under the War Risk Insurance Act and under the decisions, the Regulation is a part of the law, and therefore a matter to be interpreted and construed by the court. We held that, while the Regulation might be admissible as a part of the contract of insurance, in any event no prejudice could have resulted from its admission, because the mere fact that the jury was informed of the contents thereof before the court instructed them in relation thereto was immaterial. -

In this ease, appellant contends that the exclusion from evidence of…