Appleby v. Firemen's Fund Insurance
New York Supreme Court
HE same question is presented in these cases, hut under different aspects. The actions were upon policies of insurance, hy which the defendants insured the plaintiffs against loss or damage hy lire, on merchandise contained “in the hrick store Ho. 360 Pearl street,” in the city of Hew York.
Read the full summary
HE same question is presented in these cases, hut under different aspects. The actions were upon policies of insurance, hy which the defendants insured the plaintiffs against loss or damage hy lire, on merchandise contained “in the hrick store Ho. 360 Pearl street,” in the city of Hew York. The evidence showed that after the insurance was made, the insured rented a part of the premises, viz: the upper stories of the building, to other persons who carried on therein the business of putting together the frames of chairs Which had been made elsewhere. This was claimed to he a manufactory…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Ingraham, J.
By the word “premises,” as used in the policy, must be understood the place in which the assured had represented his property to be, and which the assurer had described in the policy to be the place where the property insured was stored. The policy, which was made in July, 1862, insured the plaintiffs against loss or damage by fire on merchandise contained in the brick store. No. 360 Pearl street. At that time the assured were the proprietors of the basement and first story of the building, and not of the whole store. The insurance they obtained, however, covered…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Coffaro v. Queen Insurance Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926