Legal Opinion

Kern Brewing Co. v. Royal Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1901PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error to St. Clair; Vance, J. Assumpsit by the Kern Brewing Company against the Royal Insurance Company on a fire policy. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, C. J.

Plaintiff signed proofs of loss by a fire, to which a schedule and apportionment were attached fixing defendant’s liability at $1,104.32. Plaintiff claims not to have known of this schedule and apportionment at the time of the signature, and that the policy and the amount of the whole loss show that defendant’s proportion should have been greater. Defendant introduced testimony tending to show that plaintiff signed the proofs *40of loss with a full understanding of their contents, and admitted that defendant’s policy covered the stock .in but one building, instead of two, as it now claims.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tanner v. MerrillMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Golden v. Bartlett Illuminating Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Snell v. WeyerhauserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Johnson v. Judges Court of AppealsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1901
  2. Eisenberg v. C. F. Battenfeld Oil Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Goldsmith v. LichtenbergMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Empire Industries, Inc. v. Northern Assurance Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Lehaney v. New York Life Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1943

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API