Salomon v. North British & Mercantile Insurance
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 3, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. ' The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. There was no mutual mistake justifying reformation of the policy. (Hearne v. Marine Ins. Co., 20 Wall. 488; Mackenzie v. Coulson, L. R. [8 Eq.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 3, 1913, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. ' The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. There was no mutual mistake justifying reformation of the policy. (Hearne v. Marine Ins. Co., 20 Wall. 488; Mackenzie v. Coulson, L. R. [8 Eq. Gas.] 368; Heilbrunn v. G. A. Ins. Co., 202 N. Y. 610; Southard v. Curley, 134 N. Y. 148; Burt v. Quackenbush, 72 App. Div. 547; 175 N.…
1Opinion of the CourtCollin, J.
The action is to have a policy of fire insurance, issued by the defendant, reformed in a certain respect and as reformed to recover thereupon a judgment for the loss sustained. The reformation sought is that the policy shall provide that the loss, if any, shall be payable to the plaintiff as mortgagee instead of providing, as in form it does, that the interest in the policy is vested in the plaintiff as owner and that the loss, if any, should be payable to Mayer Malbin and Israel Hammerman as mortgagees. Thus far the plaintiff has been successful.
In August, 1907, Malbin and Hammerman assigned…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hearne v. Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Curtis v. . AlbeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Bryce v. . Lorillard Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
- C. H. Young Co. v. SpringerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Bishop v. Clay Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Amend v. HurleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Nash v. KornblumNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Porter v. Commercial Casualty InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Ross v. Food Specialties, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1959
- New York Life Insurance v. KimballSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.