Legal Opinion

Jelin v. Home Ins.

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided January 16, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, District Judge.

The present motion is to set aside a verdict for a fire loss on insured premises. By concession its decision depends upon the construction of clauses in the policy and its modifying rider. The policy clause is the usual “vacant and unoccupied” provision. It reads: “This entire policy, unless otherwise provided by agreement indorsed hereon or added hereto, shall be void if a building herein described, whether intended for occupancy by owner or tenant, be or become vacant or unoccupied and so remain for ten days.”

The rider, contained in an indorsement transferring…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Republic County Mutual Fire Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  2. Schoeneman v. Hartford Fire InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Southern Nat. Ins. Co. v. CobbCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  4. Knowlton v. Patrons Androscoggin Fire InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905
  5. Johnson v. Inland Empire Farmers' Mutual Fire InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1929

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Speth v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2001
  2. Benson v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  3. Benson v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API