88                                             LAWS OF MARYLAND                                [Ch. 2

years raises a presumption of his death;
see Robb v. Horsey, 169 Md. 227 (1935). It
is believed that any indirect reference to
the common-law presumption of death in the
statutory language may cause confusion in
interpreting and applying this statute.
The provision dealing with sufficiency of
evidence in a jury trial is proposed for
deletion as unnecessary. The proceeding is
in equity and there is no reason to depart
from normal equity practice by providing a
jury trial.

The reference to "proceedings under Art.
93A" is included because all proceedings
for the protection of the property of
persons who have disappeared shall be taken
under Title 2 of Art. 93A.

SEC. 3-103. CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICY PROVISIONS
INVALID AND UNENFORCEABLE.

(A)     CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICY PROVISIONS
CONCERNING EVIDENCE INVALID.

A PROVISION IN ANY POLICY OF LIFE OR ACCIDENT
INSURANCE, OR IN THE CHARTER OR BYLAWS OF ANY MUTUAL
OF FRATERNAL INSURANCE ASSOCIATION CONCERNING THE
EFFECT TO BE GIVEN TO EVIDENCE OF DEATH OR ABSENCE, IS
INVALID IF THE POLICY WAS EXECUTED OR THE PROVISION
ADOPTED AFTER MAY 31, 1941.

(B)     ACTION TO BE FILED WITHIN PERIOD OF
LIMITATIONS.

IF THE POLICY, CHARTER, OR BYLAWS, EXECUTED OR
ADOPTED AFTER MAY 31, 1941, CONTAINS A PROVISION WHICH
REQUIRES A BENEFICIARY TO BEING SUIT UPON A CLAIM OF
DEATH WITHIN ONE YEAR OR OTHER PERIOD AFTER THE DEATH
OF THE INSURED AND THE FACT OF ABSENCE OF THE INSURED
IS RELIED UPON BY THE BENEFICIARY AS EVIDENCE OF THE
DEATH, NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROVISIONS IN THE POLICY,
CHARTER, OR BYLAWS, THE ACTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN THE
PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS FOR FILING AN ACTION FOR BREACH
OF CONTRACT.

(C)   WHEN LIMITATIONS BEGIN TO SUN.

FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, THE PERIOD OF
LIMITATIONS BUNS FROM THE DATE THE BENEFICIARY GIVES
WRITTEN NOTICE OF THE ABSENCE TO THE INSURES, OR IF