Rousset v. Insurance Co. of North America
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
(~ ASE for the opinion of the court in substance as lows: The defendants, on the 28th Januar~j 1~99, underwrote a~ policy of insurance in the name of Benjamin 2~Tone8, for 4000 dollars, on the brig Gharlotte, at and from Philadelphia to N. G., and at and from thence to Ma rtinique. At the time of effecting the insurance, None9 was the true owner of the Gharlotte, and she was duly registered in his name.
Read the full summary
(~ ASE for the opinion of the court in substance as lows: The defendants, on the 28th Januar~j 1~99, underwrote a~ policy of insurance in the name of Benjamin 2~Tone8, for 4000 dollars, on the brig Gharlotte, at and from Philadelphia to N. G., and at and from thence to Ma rtinique. At the time of effecting the insurance, None9 was the true owner of the Gharlotte, and she was duly registered in his name. He continued to own her until the 28th November 1799, when he sold her to the plaintiff. On that day he executed a bill of sale of the brig, and delivered into the bands of the plaintiff the…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
This cause comes before us on a case stated. Benjamin Nones had an insurance effected on the brig Charlotte. He afterwards assigned the policy to the plaintiff, and then became insolvent. There was a partial loss, concerning which there is no dispute. The only question is whether the defendants can set off against the plaintiff, a debt due from Nones at the time the policy was underwritten.
The court thought it unnecessary to hear the counsel for the defendants; because they considered this point as having been settled in the case of Gourdon (for the use of his assignees) against…
2Cited by1 opinion
- De Bolle v. Pennsylvania Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839