Young v. Newark Fire Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action upon a policy of fire insurance; brought to the Superior Court in Tolland County, and tried to the jury before Sanford, J. Verdict for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendants.
Read the full summary
Action upon a policy of fire insurance; brought to the Superior Court in Tolland County, and tried to the jury before Sanford, J. Verdict for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendants. The case is fully stated in the opinion. cited as to the right of the defendant to go forward upon the trial below, Rules under Practice Act, ch. 3, sec. 4; Gen. Statutes, § 772; Elwell v. Chamberlin, 31 N. York, 611; Davis v. Mason, 4 Pick., 156. And as to the conditional delivery of the policy and the agency of the brokers who procured it, Grace v. Am. Central Ins. Co., 109 U. S. R., 278, 281; Hermann v.…
1Opinion of the CourtFenn, J.
This is an action brought to recover upon a fire insurance policy on a stock of merchandise. The complaint alleged the plaintiffs’ ownership ; the execution of the policy by the defendant in consideration of a premium paid; a fire; the filing of proof of loss; and that the defendant had failed to pay. The answer is as follows :—
“ The defendant admits all the allegations contained in the plaintiffs’ complaint.
“First Defense. On the ninth day of March, 1888, the plaintiffs applied to an agent of the defendant, at Hartford, Connecticut, for insurance on the property described in said *44policy, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Weed's Appeal from ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1868
3Cited by16 opinions
- Livingston's Appeal From ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Western Assur. Co. of Toronto v. J. H. Mohlman Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1897
- Heiman v. FelderSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Stanley v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- O'Bryan v. Mengel CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.