Carrington v. Commercial Fire & Marine Insurance of Jersey City
The Superior Court of New York City
This action was tried before Chief Justice Oakley, and a jury, on the 9th of December, 1856. The defendants moved for a non-suit, when the evidence was closed.
Read the full summary
This action was tried before Chief Justice Oakley, and a jury, on the 9th of December, 1856. The defendants moved for a non-suit, when the evidence was closed. The court directed a verdict for the plaintiffs, for $2,203.44, the amount claimed, subject to the opinion of the court, at general term, upon the questions of law, arising in the case, with liberty to the court at general term, to dismiss the complaint, and reserved the right, to either party, to turn the case into a bill of exceptions. The complaint set forth the contract of insurance between the plaintiffs, and the Amsterdam…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Bosworth, J.
By the terms of the contract of November 30, 1854, the defendants “re-insure the .American Mutual Insurance Company, of Amsterdam, upon the following policies issued by them,” (a detailed statement of which policies is embodied in and forms part of the contract,) “ loss, if any, payable to the assured upon the same terms and conditions, and at same time, as contained in the original policies. Re-insured, from November 30, 1854, twelve o’clock at noon, to the expiration of the policy.”
If the word “ assured, ” as used in this contract, means the party re-insured, the present plaintiffs have no…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Johannes v. Phenix Insurance Co. of BrooklynWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- Gantt v. American Central InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Cashau v. Northwestern Nat. Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1873
- Ex parte NorwoodDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1873
- Hogle v. Guardian Life InsuranceThe Superior Court of New York City · 1868
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.