Krieg v. Phoenix Insurance Co. of Hartford
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Perskie, J.
The questions requiring decision are, therefore, whether the renting of the house and furniture by the assured to Britto, constituted a change of possession prohibited by the alienation clause in the policies, or whether it was merely a permissible change of occupancy ?
We have, what we believe to be, a well charted and defined course by which we are guided in the process of interpreting insurance contracts. It is based on certain established principles of law. The following are but a few of the many of these applicable principles:
1. The law…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Kupfersmith v. Delaware InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. ScammonIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- Ring v. Phœnix Assurance Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Bowling v. Continental InsuranceWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1920
- Marcello v. Concordia Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Whittle v. Associated Indemnity Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1943
- Schneider v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
- Herbert L. Farkas Co. v. New York Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1950
- Mancuso v. RothenbergNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
- Asbell v. PEARL ASSURANCE CO., LTD.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.