Legal Opinion

Shields v. Vermont Mutual Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided October 1, 1929PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoulton, J.

This is an action of contract upon the lightning clause in two polices of fire insurance, only one of which, covering a certain barn, is here in question. The answer is a general denial and special defenses. After trial by jury the verdict was for the plaintiff. The case is here on the defendant’s exceptions. The clause in question is as follows: “Lightning Clause. This policy also covers direct loss or damage to the property insured by lightning (meaning thereby the commonly accepted use of the term ‘lightning’ and in no case to include loss or damage by cyclone, tornado or windstorm)…

2Cases cited91 opinions

  1. Woodhouse v. Woodhouse Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1925
  2. Higgins, Admr. v. MetzgerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
  3. Hicks v. British America Assurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. State v. WardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1888
  5. Kent v. Town of LincolnSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Perkins v. Vermont Hydro-Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1934
  2. Johnson v. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1938
  3. State v. StacySupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
  4. State v. StorrsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1933
  5. Paska v. SaundersSupreme Court of Vermont · 1931

27 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