Hook v. Mutual Insurance Co. of Berks Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 361, Jan. T., 1894, by plaintiff, Michael W. Hook, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., Dec. T., 1889, No. 57, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit on fire insurance policy. Before Endlich, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Binding instructions were given for defendant. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was above instruction, quoting it.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The fire insurance policy on which this suit is based contains this clause: “ Any member insuring in other companies covered in part by this company, his or her policy shall be considered sunk; provided the same is not approved by this company and indorsed on his, her or their policy, in which case this company shall be liable only to the payment of a ratable proportion of any loss or damage which may be sustained.” Dur*231ing the life of the policy in suit, plaintiff procured additional insurance on same property in another company; but it does not appear that any indorsement of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bard v. Penn Mutual Fire Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
3Cited by3 opinions
- Russell v. Farmers Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Sitler v. Spring Garden Mutual Fire InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Stauffer v. Penn Mutual Fire Ins. Assn. of Lancaster Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894