Connecticut Fire Insurance v. Wigginton
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Poinsett Chancery Court; Archer Wheatley„ Chancellor; It was error to decree a reformation of the policy. A mutual mistake is not proven by that clear, decisive and convincing evidence required by courts of chancery.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Poinsett Chancery Court; Archer Wheatley„ Chancellor; It was error to decree a reformation of the policy. A mutual mistake is not proven by that clear, decisive and convincing evidence required by courts of chancery. It is not proven that it was intended to attach the “standard mortgage clause” instead of the loss payable clause. 6 L. R. A. 200; 97 U. S. 624; 73 Wis. 203; 61 L. R. A. 137; 38 S. W. 214; 2 Clements, Fire Ins. 600; 82 Ark. 226, 234; 91 Id. 171; 71 Id. 614; 111 Id. 205; 108 Id. 103; 105 Id. 455; 85 Id. 62; 151 U. S. 452, etc. The testimony is clear and convincing of a…
1DissentMcCULLOCH, C. J.
The policy of insurance sought to be reformed was issued on February 13, 1913, and was delivered to the Marked Tree Bank & Trust Company on that date with an endorsement thereon of what is commonly known as a “loss payable clause.” The building was destroyed by fire on January 9, 1915, nearly two years after the issuance of the policy, without any complaint having been made concerning the form of the endorsement.
A policy of insurance is a written contract between the insurer and the beneficiary, and the right to a reformation of the contract in equity on the ground of mutual mistake must,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mitchell Manufacturing Co. v. KempnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Colonial & United States Mortgage Co. v. JeterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Remmel v. GriffinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Stewart v. FlemingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Gray v. StoneSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.