Legal Opinion

Northwestern Transportation Co. v. Thames & Mersey Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1886PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Jennison, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

Plaintiff brought an action upon a policy of marine insurance, issued by the defendant upon the steamer Manitoba, whereby the plaintiff, as owner, was insured in the sum of $7,500, against total loss and general *219average only. The steamer was valued in the policy at $36,000. She was also insured by the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania in the sum of $3,350 ; by the Continental Insurance Company, $10,000; and by the Union Insurance Company in the sum of $10,000 — leaving $5,150 at owner’s risk. On the sixth of November, 1883, the policies being then in force, the steamer left the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Comegys v. VasseSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  2. The Patapsco Insurance Company v. SouthgateSupreme Court of the United States · 1831
  3. Hayes v. LivingstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  4. Peeks v. Merchants' Ins. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1822
  5. The Chesapeake Insurance Company v. StarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1810

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Northwest Transp. Co. v. The ManitobaDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1887
  2. Alliance Insurance v. Producers Cotton Oil Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Richelieu & Ontario Navigation Co. v. Thames & Mersey Marine InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

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

Powered by the Exa API