Legal Opinion

Mihalcho v. Massachusetts Fire & Marine Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 15, 1930PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The question of increased hazard is a proper subject for expert evidence. (Cornish v. Farm Buildings Fire Ins. Co., 74 N. Y. 295; Leitch v. Atlantic Mutual Ins. Co., 66 id. 100; Carroll v. Home Insurance Co., 51 App. Div. 149.) Evidence of an offer to compromise was not competent. Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman, Whitmyer, Hill and Hasbrouck, JJ., concur. Judgment and order reversed on the law and new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cornish v. . Farm Buildings Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Carroll v. Home InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Williamson v. SchwartzNew York Supreme Court · 1962