Southern Pants Co. v. Rochester German Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from Adams, J., at October Term, 1911, of MecK-LENBTTRG. The'facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr. Chief Justice Clark.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
This action is to recover against nine insurance companies for loss admitted by tbem to have been sustained in tbe destruction by fire of a stock of merchandise. Tbe only controversy raised is as to tbe validity of said policies by reason of tbe fact tbat a receiver having been appointed of tbe Southern Pants Company, prior to tbe fire, tbe defendants contend tbat be was in actual possession of tbe property at tbe time of tbe fire, and thus they claim tbe insurance was forfeited under tbe clause in tbe policies against change in tbe “interest, title, or possession” of tbe property insured.
Tbe…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thompson v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Union Bank of Chicago v. Kansas City BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Grady v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- Georgia Home Insurance v. BartlettSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
- Farmers' Fire Insurance v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Greenwich Bank v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. of HartfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Blades v. Hood Ex Rel. Savings Bank & Trust Co. of Elizabeth CitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Bowling v. Continental InsuranceWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1920
- Parker v. Iowa Mutual Tornado InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1935
- Critchlow v. Reliance Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.