Violette v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania

This action was to recover on a fire insurance policy for the loss of a certain stock of liquor. Appellant having been nonsuited below, prosecutes this appeal.

There is no serious conflict in the evidence, which shows that C. E. and M. F. Hamilton, husband and wife, respectively, were each the authorized agent of several insurance companies. Appellant was experiencing trouble in keeping his stock of liquor insured, and was notified by C. E. Hamilton, on December 28, 1914, that a former policy of the Prussian National Insurance Company on the liquor had been ordered canceled, but that he would…