Dives v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 225, Jan. T., 1902, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., Aug. T., 1901, No. 56, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Josiah Dives and George S. Pomeroy, trading as Dives, Pomeroy & Stewart, v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York. Assumpsit on policies of insurance against contractor’s liability for accidents. Before Endlich, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 225, Jan. T., 1902, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., Aug. T., 1901, No. 56, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Josiah Dives and George S. Pomeroy, trading as Dives, Pomeroy & Stewart, v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York. Assumpsit on policies of insurance against contractor’s liability for accidents. Before Endlich, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,097.07. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were (1) in refusing motion to compel plaintiffs to elect on which of the two counts of their…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Brown,
When about to erect a store building in the city of Reading, the appellees applied to the appellant, a casualty company, for insurance against loss for injuries sustained by employees and others during the erection of the building. Two applications were made by the insured and two policies were issued in pursuance of them. The company had two forms of policies, one known as the “ Contractors’ Employers’ Liability Form,” and the other as the “ Contractors’ Public Liability Form.” The policies issued to the appellees were in these respective forms.
In the opinion of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barnhart v. RiddleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rieger v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1919
- Gould v. BrockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908